

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, 



ShelfJ3£l2-&l 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



tK3 




JAN # 



138/ 



Spiritualism Sustained 



— IN- 



FIVE LECTURES. 



— BY — 



JOHN R. KELSO, A.M. 






> 




New York: 

PRINTED AT THE TRUTH SEEKER OFFICE, 

33 Clinton Place. 



V 



*>Q> 






Copyrighted, 1886, 

BY 

John R. Kelso. 



J 



CONTENTS 



LECTURE. PAGE. 

I. Spiritualism Sustained by the Bible, . 7 

II. Spiritualism Sustained by the Christian 

Church, . . . . .50 

III. Spiritualism a Necessity in God's Gen- 
eral Government, .... 102 

IY. Spiritual Mediumship, . . . . 156 

Y. Objections to Spiritualism Answered, . 204 



PREFACE. 



Confidently believing that, notwithstanding its 
many admitted imperfections, this little book is 
calculated to do much good, the author has no 
apology to offer for placing it before the world. 
All that he has to say is : " Let it stand or 
fall upon its own merit ! ;! If, in the estima- 
tion of the intelligent and progressive minds of 
the present age, it possess real merit, it will 
stand ; if not, it will fall. This is just as it 
should be. Will those whose decision is in its 
favor please help place it before the world? 

The Author. 



SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED, 



LECTURE I. 

SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED BY THE BIBLE. 

. As you are doubtless all well aware, Spiritualism 
rests upon what its advocates regard as two grand 
and well established truths. The first of these truths 
is : " That man, after the dissolution of the body, 
continues still to exist as a conscious and intelligent 
being." The second is: " That disembodied men, 
called spirits, can, under certain conditions, and fre- 
quently do, in various ways, carry on intelligible cor- 
respondence with persons still in the body." 

In some form, the first of these truths is almost 
universally accepted by every nation and every tribe 
of the world. In my present lecture, therefore, I 
shall omit any further notice of it, and give my entire 
attention to the proving of the second truth, that of 
spiritual communications. In proving these commu- 
nications to be facts, I shall give the only positive 
proofs that can possibly be given of man's immor- 
tality as a conscious individual. 

The doctrine of spiritual communications is pecul- 
iar to Spiritualists, and a belief in this doctrine con- 
stitutes a man a Spiritualist, even though he may 



8 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

disclaim the appellation, and though he may be a 
member of an orthodox church.* Indeed, there are 
many Spiritualists among the members of every 
religious denomination of the world. 

Though the claims of Spiritualism can all be fully 
established without the evidence of the Bible, yet 
there are many persons who, on this subject, will re- 
ceive nothing as evidence unless it comes from the 
Bible. For the benefit of this class of persons, there- 
fore, I propose, in my present lecture, to prove by 
the Bible the truth of every phase of Spiritualism. 
In doing this I shall compel these persons to either 
reject the evidence of the Bible and to thus become 
Infidels, or to admit the truths of Spiritualism and 
to thus become Spiritualists. In either of these cases 
my object will have been accomplished. They will 
have been freed from the slavish mental chains in 
which priestcraft has so long held them bound, and 
will have taken their places in the ranks of the grand 
army of Liberalism. 

You may object, however, that, after having writ- 
ten and published a large work for the express pur- 
pose of proving the Bible to be totally unworthy of 
belief, I have no right to use its testimony as evidence 
in the present case. To this objection I reply that 
the Bible is your own witness — the only witness 
whose testimony in this case you will receive as evi- 
dence ; and, since I can win my case on the testimony 
of your witness alone, I have an indisputable right to 
do so. I shall not, therefore, impeach the testimony 
of your witness in this case, no matter what I may 
think of his credibility. I shall show that his testi- 
mony, if accepted, fully establishes the truths of 



BY THE BIBLE. \) 

Spiritualism, and then let you impeach that testi- 
mony, if you wish to do so. In short, I propose, for 
the sake of the argument, to concede all that you 
claim for the Bible and for the God of the Bible — in 
whose real existence I have not a particle of faith — 
and then, on your own ground and with your own 
weapons, to gain over you a complete victory for the 
glorious cause of Spiritualism. 

I wish, in the first place, to determine, so far as 
possible, the nature of those personages so often 
mentioned in the Bible, called angels. These* per- 
sonages play a conspicuous part, not only in the 
religion of the Jews, but also in that of the Christians. 
In order, then, to correctly understand the history of 
either of these religions, it becomes absolutely indis- 
pensable that we know exactly what those angels 
were ; or, rather, what they are, since they are sup- 
posed to be still in existence. They have generally 
been assumed to constitute a distinct order of intelli- 
gences higher than that of man This assumption, 
however, as I shall clearly prove, is not well founded. 
I shall prove that the personages called angels in the 
Bible were neither more nor less than human beings, 
some of whom were still in the body, while others 
were in the form of spirits. I shall also prove that, 
if the angels of the Bible were, in any respect, supe- 
rior to other human beings, their superiority con- 
sisted, not in a higher nature, but simply in a higher 
condition — in higher attainments or in higher official 
importance. 

In regard to the origin of angels there exists, 
among theologians, a great diversity of opinions. 
Some conjecture that angels were created long before 



10 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

the creation of the world and of man. Others hold, 
and correctly, too, as I shall soon show, that angels 
were included in the six-days' creation of which the 
Bible gives an account. These are the two most 
common opinions in regard to this matter. 

The reason assigned for the former of these two 
opinions is that, otherwise, God must have been 
utterly alone and totally unemployed during the en- 
tire eternity that must, of necessity, have preceded 
the creation of the material universe. Those who 
entertain this opinion, however, overlook the impor- 
tant fact that, by their assumption, they merely place 
these difficulties further back without tending in the 
least to remove them. They overlook the important 
fact that, if angels were ever created at all, the period 
of time which has elapsed since their creation, be it 
ever so immense, is, nevertheless, undeniably a finite 
period, and that this finite period, taken from the 
infinite period of God's existence, must, of necessity, 
leave undiminished an infinite period still beyond. 
Indeed, there can be no assignable point in the past, 
whether it be that at which men were created, or 
angels, or anything else, beyond which infinite dura- 
tion does not still extend. No finite period, taken 
from that infinite period,. can possibly render the lat- 
ter any the less ; and no finite period, added to that 
infinite period, can possibly render the latter any the 
greater. In short, it is an indisputable fact that no 
change of any kind can possibly be made in an in- 
finite period. No matter, then, how long ago God 
may have created the angels, he must, of absolute 
necessity, have existed just as long previous to their 
creation as he has existed previous to the present 



BY THE BIBLE. 11 

time. In any possible view of the case, then, God 
must, of absolute necessity, have spent an utterly 
endless, and yet an actually ended, period of dura- 
tion, utterly alone and unemployed, previous to the 
point at which he began the creation of anything at 
all. With the ideas that now generally prevail in 
regard to duration no one can deny the truth of this 
last statement, and yet, as you clearly perceive, it 
involves a palpable absurdity, an utter impossibility, 
affecting the very existence of God himself. In pre- 
vious works, "Deity Analyzed" and "The Bible 
Analyzed," I have much more fully considered this 
matter, and in a future work, "The Universe Analyzed," 
I shall consider it still further, giving some entirely 
original and, as I believe, very valuable ideas of what 
is called duration. At present I can give the sub- 
ject no further notice. 

As I have already stated, other theologians hold 
that angels, like man and the lower animals, were 
made during the six days in which " the Lord made 
heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is." 
If angels are human beings, this view is undeniably 
the correct one. Indeed, it is bound to be the correct 
view any way. Since all the things that are in heaven, 
or on the earth, or in the sea, were made at that 
time, and since all who believe in the existence of 
angels at all admit that they are either in heaven or 
on earth, they are bound to have been included in 
the " all " that were made at that time. If, then, 
they be a distinct and higher order of beings, is it 
not very strange that man, and even the birds, the 
beasts, the creeping things, the plants, etc., should 
all be distinctly mentioned as being created at that 



12 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

time, and not a word said about angels ? Is it reason- 
able to assume that the highest creature of all made 
on that occasion was thus entirely overlooked ? Be- 
sides this, the Bible certainly represents man as the 
masterpiece made on that occasion — as being more 
like God than was any other creature. And how 
could this be if the angels, who were created at the 
same time, were a still higher order of beings than 
was man, and still more like God ? This becomes still 
more strange, too, when we consider that, according 
to all orthodox teachings, angels all derive their ori- 
gin from direct creation, and not, like man and other 
living creatures, from a single original pair, through 
the process of procreation or parentage. On this 
hypothesis countless legions of angels must have 
been manufactured all at once on that memorable 
occasion. This marked exception to the general rule 
of creation observed on that occasion, had it really 
existed, would surely have been noticed in a special 
manner. 

Besides all this, according to the teachings of all 
orthodox theologians, the angels are all males, all 
chronic old bachelors, no such things as angelesses 
* being known among them. There being no females 
among them probably accounts for the fact that they 
are so good and so happy. Why could not men have 
been made on that same plan ? And yet, on the 
hypothesis that all things exhibit marks of design, of 
what design, in the total absence of all females, does 
the male sex of those angels exhibit the marks? 
Since all the living creatures mentioned in the Bible 
account of creation were made male and female, and 
were commanded to increase and multiply, these an- 



BY THE BIBLE. 13 

gelic old bachelors again formed so marked an excep- 
tion to the general rule that they should cer- 
tainly have been noticed in a special manner. It 
may be, however, that, in consequence of the 
rawness of the material of which himself had just 
been manufactured, Adam's brain was a little muddy, 
and that, when he saw the new-made mud birds and 
the equally new-made mud angels all flopping around 
together, trying to fly, he mistook them all for birds, 
and hence failed to notice angels as a distinct order 
of beings. This assumption removes every difficulty 
and is fully as reasonable as are any of those ad- 
vanced in favor of an origin for angels distinct from 
that of men. Be all this as it may, however, the 
angels, as I have already shown, certainly must have 
been included in the Bible's six-days' creation. To 
attempt, therefore, to place the creation of angels 
outside of those six days would be to contradict 
the Bible and to involve yourselves in inextricable 
difficulties and absurdities, which, however, I cannot 
now notice. 

And to admit that the angels were included in the 
Bible's six-days' creation, and yet, at the same time, 
to assume that they were made a distinct order of 
intelligences, would, as we have just seen, involve you 
in equally insurmountable difficulties. On this as- 
sumption you cannot possibly explain why angels 
were never seen or even heard of until men had be- 
come spirits. You will notice that, before any men 
had become spirits, God in person bore all of his 
own messages to mankind, and in person received all 
the messages of mankind to himself. Afterwards, 
however, you will also notice, he had all of these 



14 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

messages borne by angels, who invariably appeared 
in the human form, and who were generally called 
men. And now, how can you account for these facts, 
except on the hypothesis that God had no angels or 
messengers until he had human spirits to serve him 
in that capacity. 

Theologians have also differed very widely as to 
whether angels do or do not have bodies. One of the 
councils of Nice, in 787, voted them an ethereal body, 
but this was taken from them by a majority vote of 
the Lateran council of 1215, and it was made a capi- 
tal offense to teach that they had bodies of any kind. 
Whether they have, or have not, bodies, I do not now 
care to discuss. In fact, it makes no difference. It 
is sufficient for my purpose to prove that they are 
human beings. 

The word angel is derived, with very little change 
of form, from the Greek, and means simply a mes- 
senger or a minister. It conveys no idea of superi- 
ority beyond that of official importance. Indeed, 
angels appear originally to have been mere personi- 
fications of natural forces, special providences, and 
even of inanimate material objects. As we now, by 
personification, speak of a pestilence, a thunderbolt, 
or a cannon ball, as a messenger of death, so by the 
same figure of speech, the ancients spoke of such 
things as angels of death. When the term angel was 
applied to persons, it was to those only who were 
acting as messengers, ministers, agents, etc., and then 
it imported their office or occupation and not their 
origin or nature. Any man, whether in the body or 
in the spirit form, became an angel the moment he 
became a messenger, a minister, etc., and ceased to 



BY THE BIBLE. 15 

be an angel the moment lie ceased to act in such ca- 
pacity. He was an angel of the king, an angel of the 
church, an angel of the Lord, an angel of the devil, 
an angel of death, etc., according to the party in 
whose service he was acting, or the kind of occupa- 
tion in which he was engaged. Men and angels are 
spoken of in the Bible just as men and messengers 
are spoken of among ourselves. That I am correct 
in this is a fact well known to everyone who is at all 
acquainted with the Greek language. 

In the eighteenth and nineteenth chapters of Gen- 
esis we have an account of three persons who dis- 
played wonderful powers, foretelling future events, 
striking whole crowds of men with blindness, de- 
stroying cities with fire from heaven, etc., and yet 
who, a part of the time, are called men, and a part of 
the time angels. First the one of these terms is 
applied to them and then the other. The writer evi- 
dently considers the two terms synonymous, so far 
as the nature of the individuals to whom he applies 
them is concerned. Sometimes he speaks of those 
individuals in their official or professional capacity, 
and then, of course, he calls them angels ; this term 
being used, as I have already stated, to indicate the 
official or professional capacity of persons, and never 
for any other purpose. At other times he speaks of 
them in their private or personal capacity, and then, 
of course, he calls them men ; this term being used 
to indicate the nature or order of the beings to whom 
it is applied and never for any other purpose. This 
use of the two terms is entirely proper, if angels are 
men, and men, when acting as messengers, ministers, 
etc, are angels. If, however, men and angels are 



16 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

different orders of beings, an angel cannot be a man, 
nor can a man be an angel. On this hypothesis the 
Bible speaks falsely when it declares that the indi- 
viduals in question were men, and, at the same time, 
angels. As well might it declare that a certain ani- 
mal was a monkey, and, at the same time, an elephant. 
"Will you bring the charge of falsehood against the 
Bible ? If not, are you not compelled to admit that 
those three angels were human beings — the spirits of 
men — and that they gave some wonderful spiritual 
manifestations ? 

That those three angels were men is still further 
proved by the fact that they had forms like the forms 
of men ; that they, had voices like the voices of men ; 
that, in walking, their feet became soiled, as do the 
feet of men ; that they grew weary and hungry and 
thirsty after the manner of men ; that they ate and 
drank as do men ; that they used the same kinds of 
food and drink as are used by men ; that they sought 
shelter from the heat of the sun as do men ; that they 
talked and reasoned as do men; that they slept in 
houses as do men ; that, in every respect, they resem- 
bled men. If, then, they were not men, as the Bible 
says they were, what were they and in what respect 
did they differ from men? If that portion of the 
story be false which declares that those three angels 
were men, may not the whole story be equally false ? 

In Genesis xxxii we have an account of a wrestling 
match between Jacob and a heavenly being — God's 
messenger or representative — and yet the Bible calls 
this being a man, and has Jacob, after a long tussle, 
beat him in the wrestling match. If that heavenly 
being was a man — a human spirit — was not this affair 



BY THE BIBLE. 17 

a wonderful spiritual manifestation ? Was not ma- 
terialization exhibited in it to perfection? Was not 
Jacob a remarkable spiritual medium ? And was not 
this spiritual manifestation made by a good spirit 
through a good medium ? Is not the same true of the 
wonderful spiritual manifestations, already described, 
made by the three men-angels to Abraham ? What 
can you say, in these two remarkable cases, against 
either the mediums who received the communications 
or the spirits who sent them ? Dare you say that the 
angels mentioned in these two cases were not men, 
when the Bible says they were? And dare you, with 
these two cases before you, declare that all Spiritu- 
alism iaiof the devil ? Had the devil anything to do 
in these two cases ? 

In Acts xxiii we have an account of a fierce dissen- 
sion which Paul, for his own safety, excited between 
the Pharisees, who believed in the existence of angels 
and of other spirits, and the Sadducees, who denied the 
existence of both. The ninth verse says : "And there 
arose a great cry ; and the scribes that were of the 
Pharisees' part arose, and strove, saying, We find no 
evil in this man, but if a spirit or an angel hath 
spoken to him, let us not fight against God." This 
shows plainly enough that all of those Jews who 
believed in the existence of angels and spirits at all, 
believed that both could, and that both did, sometimes 
appear unto men and converse with them. It also 
shows that those Spiritualistic Jews believed that 
spirits and angels were the same, or were, at least, so 
nearly alike that a man could not well distinguish 
between them. They did not doubt that Paul had 
seen a spirit of some kind. Their only doubt was as 



18 SPIKITUALISM SUSTAINED 

to whether that spirit was an angel or official spirit, 
or whether it was an ordinary, unofficial spirit. They 
also regarded all opposition to spiritual communica- 
tions as fighting " against God." How unlike the so- 
called orthodox of the present day, who, in opposing 
similar spiritual phenomena, claim to be fighting 
against the devil. The Sadducees also regarded angels 
and spirits as the same, and in denying the existence 
of the one, they were bound to deny the existence of 
the other. 

Matthew says that when certain women went to 
the sepulcher of Jesus they saw there an angel who 
informed them that Jesus had risen from the dead. 
Mark declares that this angel was a young man. 
Luke says there were two angels, and John says these 
two angels were two men. These two men were in 
shining garments, from which fact we may know that 
they were disembodied men, or spirits. And now, I 
ask, were those bright beings, at the same time, both 
men and angels, the two terms being equally applica- 
ble to them ? If not, do not two of the Evangelists lie 
in declaring that they were angels, when they were 
not ; or the other two, in declaring that they were 
men, when they were not ? If angels and men are dis- 
tinct orders of beings, it is impossible for the asser- 
tions of both sets of Evangelists to be true. Dare 
you, then, deny that men and angels are the same by 
nature ? If you dare do this, then which set of Evan- 
gelists are guilty of lying ? 

If, by nature, men and angels are the same, then 
all the Evangelists equally* speak the truth. Two of 
them speak of the bright beings in question, in their 
official capacity, and, of course, call them angels. 



BY THE BIBLE. 19 

The other two speak of them in their private capac- 
ity, and, of course, call them men. 

On that same occasion, so Matthew informs us, 
many other spirits made their appearance, but those 
at the sepulcher, being the only ones acting as mes- 
sengers, were the only ones that were called angels, 
or that could have been so called. These angels, then, 
were simply human spirits on duty as messengers ; 
and this fact proves not only the truth of Spiritual- 
ism, but also its acceptance in the sight of Heaven — 
its adoption by God himself as the means by which 
to usher in the Christian Dispensation. I defy any 
escape from these conclusions without a total rejec- 
tion of the whole story of the resurrection of Jesus. 

In Mark xii, 25, Jesus declares that in the resur- 
rection men " are as the angels which are in heaven." 
Gan men be "as the angels" and still be different 
from them ? In Luke xx, 36, Jesus, speaking of 
resurrected men or spirits, declares that "they are 
equal unto the angels." Being "as the angels which 
are in heaven," and " equal unto " them, cannot hu- 
man spirits communicate with men and do all other 
things that can be done by angels ? If you admit that 
they can, yo,u indorse in full all the claims of Spirit- 
ualism. If you deny that they can, you deny that 
they " are as the angels which are in heaven," and 
" equal unto " them. By this denial you make Jesus 
a liar. Shall we believe him or you ? 

In Rev. xxii, 8, 9, we read: "And I, John, saw 
these things and heard them. And when I had heard 
and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of 
the angel which showed me these things. Then saith 
he unto me, See thou do it not : for I am thy fellow 



20 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

servant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of 
them which keep the sayings of this book : "Worship 
God." This angel, then, was certainly a human 
spirit. From preceding chapters we learn that this 
was one of seven angels of the same order, and that 
he possessed as wonderful powers as are ascribed to 
any other angels mentioned in the whole Bible. 
Here, then, were seven angels, of a very high order, 
who were human spirits, or at least one of them was 
a human spirit, and he was equal, in every respect, 
to any one of the others. 

On another occasion, as we learn from Rev. xix, 
10, John, in his refreshing simplicity and wonderful 
religious zeal, attempted to worship another angel, 
who was thus constrained to declare himself one of 
John's brethren, and, of course, a human spirit. In 
the preceding chapter we learn that this angel was 
also possessed of "great power," and "that the 
earth was lightened with his glory." This human 
spirit, then, was an angel pre-eminently great and 
glorious. With these examples before you, can you 
deny that Jesus spake the truth when he declared 
that human spirits " are as the angels which are in 
heaven," and "equal unto" them? These two angels, 
being the only ones that John attempted to worship, 
were the only ones that had any occasion to declare 
their nature. Had he attempted to worship any of 
the other angels with whom he conversed, he would 
doubtless have learned from their own lips that they, 
too, were of his " brethren the prophets, and of them 
which keep the sayings of this book." At any rate, 
I defy you to point out in the whole Bible a single 
instance in which any angel ascribed to himself any 



BY THE BIBLE. 21 

other than a human nature and a human origin. I 
will further defy you to point out in the whole Bible 
a single passage from which, when taken with its 
context, it can be fairly inferred that angels have any 
other than a human nature and a human origin. 

In Rev. xxi, 17, we read : " And he measured the 
wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, 
according to the measure of a man, that is, of the 
angel." Here John informs us that the measure was 
that of a man, and that the man was the angel of 
whom he had just been speaking. Does not this 
make the angel a man and the man an angel? If in 
some other writing we should read : " The wall was 
a hundred and forty-four yards long, according to 
the measurement of a man of our party, that is, of 
the guide," would we not understand the man to be 
a guide, and the guide to be a man ? And is not this 
supposed case an exact parallel to that given by 
John ? If then, in the one case, the guide be a man, 
is not the angel, in the other case, bound to be a man 
also ? 

In 1 Cor. vi, 3, Paul says : " Know ye not that we 
shall judge angels ?" Could we judge a superior order 
of beings ? Could we judge any but human beings ? 
In the eleventh chapter of this same book Paul re- 
quires the women to cover their heads in church, 
u because of the angels." Few passages of scripture 
have caused theologians more perplexity than has 
this. They cannot see any good reason why the 
women of that church, or of any other, should have 
been required to cover their heads " because of the 
angels." With their views of angels there would be 
no reason for such a requirement. If, however, they 



22 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

will consider that tnose angels were simply messen- 
gers, or ministers, from other churches, the difficulty 
will at once disappear. 

Many of those messengers were probably from 
countries in Asia, where none but lewd women were 
wont to go uncovered in public. These messengers, 
or angels, as they were called, would have been 
shocked to see a church filled with uncovered women. 
To them it would have appeared like a vast house of 
ill fame. Indeed, as we learn from other portions of 
the same chapter, it was a house of very doubtful 
fame. This church was - at Corinth, and there, as in 
Asia, the women, especially if married, were wont to 
go veiled, or covered, in public. The members of 
this church, however, as Paul informs us, were 
accustomed to meet, in the name of the Lord, for the 
purpose of eating, drinking, and carousing. To such 
an extent had they carried their pious dissipation 
that, from " this cause," many of them had become 
weak and sickly, and many others had already died 
untimely deaths. Demoralized by such a life, the 
women, it seems, had begun to go uncovered in their 
meetings, and had thus brought reproach upon the 
church. For this Paul reproves them, and, in sub- 
stance, lets them know that, if they have no regard 
for the opinions of those among whom they live, they 
ought, at least, to respect the feelings and the 
opinions of the messengers and ministers — "the 
angels" — from other churches, who, like himself, 
having never been accustomed to see respectable 
women go uncovered, could not become reconciled to 
this innovation. 

As a reason for his instructions on this subject 



BY THE BIBLE. 23 

Paul refers, not to such views as the inhabitants of 
heaven might be supposed to entertain in regard to 
the wearing of the hair and of head-dresses, but to 
the well-known prejudices of the men of that time 
and of that country. Read the whole chapter, and 
you will see that my conclusions are all correct. 

These angels, then, were simply living men from 
other churches. Being messengers, or ministers, 
they w r ere, of course, called angels. Spoken of in their 
official capacity they could not, in Greek, have been 
called anything else. The same is bound to be true 
also of the seven angels of the seven churches, of 
Ephesus, Pergamus, etc. These angels were simply 
the ministers in charge of those churches. Dr. Clarke 
admits this, as do nearly all other theologians whose 
opinions are worthy of notice. To suppose anything 
else, indeed, than that those angels were the living 
ministers of the several churches named, involves 
more absurdities and difficulties than theologians 
have ever been able to explain away. 

If, however, you reject my views, and hold that all 
these angels were spirits from heaven, you give 
Spiritualism a good indorsement, for then you have 
such spirits among us, taking a lively interest in our 
affairs, even intermeddling in the fashions of our 
women and communicating to certain chronic old 
bachelors, like Paul, their objections to certain styles 
of female head-gear and their preference for others. 
"Without such communications Paul could not have 
known how the angels wished the women of Corinth 
to wear their hair and to dress their heads. You thus 
make Paul a spiritual medium, receiving and impart- 
ing spiritual communications, such as you would 



24 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

stigmatize as ridiculous if gravely reported and acted 
upon by Spiritualists of the present time. 

In the thirteenth chapter of Judges we have an 
account of an angel of God who declared himself a 
man. The eleventh verse says : " And Manoah arose, 
and went after his wife, and came to the man, and 
said unto him, Art thou the man that spakest unto 
the woman? And he said, I am." This angel, then, 
was a man, or, rather, a human spirit. That he was 
not a man in the body we learn from the twentieth 
verse, which says : "For it came to pass, when the 
flame went up toward heaven from off the altar, that 
the angel of the Lord ascended in the flame of the 
altar." Here, again, we have positive proof that 
angels are human beings. In this wonderful spiritual 
manifestation we also have conclusive proof that, so 
far from condemning Spiritualism, God makes use of 
it in his dealings with men. 

In Zech. i, 8, we read : " I saw by night, and behold 
a man riding upon a red horse, and he stood among 
the myrtle-trees that were in the bottom." The tenth 
verse says : " And the man that stood among the 
myrtle-trees answered and said, These are they whom 
the Lord hath sent to walk to and fro through the 
earth." This answer made known the fact that the 
man was a messenger, and hence, in the next verse, 
he is spoken of as such, and is, of course, called an 
angel. " And they answered the angel of the Lord 
that stood among the myrtle-trees," etc. You will 
also notice that this messenger was riding upon a 
horse. There is nothing strange in this fact, if the 
messenger was a man. If, however, he was such a 
being as our modern theologians represent angels to 



BY THE BIBLE. 25 

be, he must have appeared quite out of place jogging 
along on a " red horse," or on a horse of any other 
color. 

In Gal. iv, 14, Paul says : " And my temptation 
which was in the flesh ye despised not, nor rejected ; 
but received me as an angel of God." He then goes 
on to approve their manner of receiving him. If he 
had not been an angel of God, would he have suffered 
the Gallatians to receive him as one ? Or, if angels 
had been a higher order of beings than men, would 
he have accepted honors due only to individuals of 
that higher order? See how promptly, at another 
time, he put a stop to the proceedings of certain other 
persons who were about to worship him as a god. 
Not being a god, he was deeply shocked at the mere 
thought of receiving honors due only to gods ; but, 
being a messenger or an angel of God, he was pleased 
to receive the honors due to such a personage. How 
could you, in Greek, express his official character as 
messenger of God, without calling him an " angel of 
God?" 

In 2 Sam. xix, 27, we read : " And he hath slan- 
dered thy servant unto my lord the king ; but my 
lord the king is an angel of God." This " angel of 
God " was David, king of Israel. And was not David 
a human being ? If so, are not angels of God human 
beings? In what respect did Paul and David differ 
from other angels of God? This is a fair question, 
and theologians ought to be able to answer it. 

In Matt, xviii, 10, we read : " Take heed that ye 
despise not one of these little ones ; for I say unto 
you, That in heaven their angels do always behold 
the face of my Father which is in heaven." Dr. 



26 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

Clarke and many other able Bible critics hold, as do 
I, that, by this language, Jesus means to assert that 
every person, and especially every child, has a guard- 
ian angel or spirit guide, who has special charge of 
him and who is admitted into the presence of God to 
receive instructions concerning his charge. If this 
be, indeed, what Jesus means to assert, then the 
assertion fully establishes Spiritualism, for such a 
guardianship involves the necessity of constant com- 
munications between our own world and the world of 
spirits. If, however, this is not what Jesus means, 
he is bound to mean that the spirits of the little ones 
themselves are the angels that " do always behold the 
face of my father which is in heaven." If this be his 
meaning, he certainly has human spirits become 
angels, and thus establishes the doctrine for which I 
am contending. These two are the only meanings 
that can possibly be given to the language in ques- 
tion, and either of these meanings, you plainly see, 
fully establishes Spiritualism. 

Thus I might go on and quote hundreds of other 
passages all going to show that angels are human 
beings, either in the body or out of it ; and that, con- 
sequently, all the acts recorded of angels were either 
the acts of living men or of human spirits. But what 
need of more proof ? I have proved that one office or 
occupation constitutes one man, or one spirit, an 
angel, just as another office or occupation constitutes 
another man, or another spirit, a soldier. The only 
difference between angels and soldiers consists alone 
in the difference between their offices or occupations. 
They are both equally human, and it would be just 
as easy to establish a separate creation for soldiers 



BY THE BIBLE. 27 

as for angels. But why is it, you ask, that there 
seem to be no females among the angels? And why 
is it, I ask, that there seem to be no females among 
the soldiers ? The same reason exists in both cases ; 
neither the occupation of the angel, nor that of the 
soldier, is suitable for females. But many of the 
angels of the Bible, you say, were spirits. So were 
many of the soldiers. See Josh, v, 13-15 ; Dan. x, 
20 ; Bev. xii, 7, and many other places. 

If I have not now proved that all angels are human 
beings, I certainly have proved that some of them 
are, and that these are exactly like the other angels 
and fully equal to them in all respects. And does not 
this amount to a scientific demonstration that all 
angels are human beings ? When a naturalist deter- 
mines the origin, the general characteristics, etc., of 
a large number of lions, taken at random as speci- 
mens, does he not, at the same time, with absolute 
certainty determine the origin, the general character- 
istics, etc., of all other exactly similar lions ? And is 
not this exactly what I have done in regard to all 
angels ? Besides all this, I have proved by Jesus that, 
whether they ever become angels or not, human 
spirits certainly do become "as the angels," and 
" equal unto " them. In proving this I have proved 
that human spirits can communicate with men and 
do all other things that can be done by angels. Can 
you, then, reject Spiritualism without rejecting the 
Bible? 

I will now notice a few of the many cases of spirit- 
ual manifestations recorded in the Bible of parties 
who did not claim to be angels. 

In 2 Chron. xviii, 19-21, we read : " And the Lord 



28 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

said, "Who sliall entice Ahab, king of Israel, that he 
may go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead ? And one 
spake saying after this manner, and another saying 
after that manner. Then there came out a spirit, and 
stood before the Lord, and said, I will entice him. 
And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he 
said, I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth 
of all his prophets. And the Lord said, Thou shalt 
entice him, and thou shalt also prevail : go out and 
do even so." Accordingly, as we learn from the bal- 
ance of this same chapter, this spirit did go out, and 
did communicate with Ahab, through certain spiritual 
mediums, called prophets. 

You are bound to admit that this was a genuine 
spirit ; that these prophets were genuine spiritual 
mediums, and that the communications made through 
them were genuine spiritual communications. Will 
you be so kind, then, as to inform us why there may 
not now be just as genuine spirits, just as genuine 
spiritual mediums, and just as genuine spiritual com- 
munications as there were then? You may attempt 
to evade this fair and proper question by objecting 
that the spirit in question was an evil spirit. Such 
an evasion, however, is no answer. It is only a proof 
that you are driven to desperation, and that you dare 
not, on this subject, meet me in fair discussion. 
Neither the character of the spirit, nor that of the 
communications made by him, has anything to do 
with the facts in the case. What we want to know — 
what all searchers after truth want to know — is : Did 
the spirit in question, or did he not, actually com- 
municate with Ahab, through certain persons, such 
as we now call spiritual mediums ? If he did, is not 



BY THE BIBLE. 29 

the truth of Spiritualism established ? If he did not, 
is not the Bible convicted of falsehood ? Which 
horn of this dilemma will you take ? 

We would also like to know whether God did, or 
did not, command the spirit in question to do just 
what he did. If God did give such a command, was 
he not commanding the practice of Spiritualism? 
And -if God commanded the practice of Spiritualism, 
how dare you say, as many of you do, that Spirit- 
ualism is of the devil ? Does God, think you, in the 
conducting of his affairs, adopt the practices and the 
inventions of the devil ? Can he not devise means 
of his own for the conducting of those affairs ? If, 
on the other hand, God did not give the command in 
question, does not the Bible again stand convicted of 
falsehood ? 

Again, admitting that God did give this command, 
did the spirit in question, or did he not, act wickedly 
in obeying it ? If he did act wickedly, did not God 
act still more wickedly in giving the command? If 
you condemn the spirit because he lied, what have 
you to say of God, by whose command he lied ? If, 
on the other hand, the spirit did not act wickedly, 
how dare you call him an evil spirit ? What do you 
know of his character, except what you learn from 
the history of this one affair ? Was he not just such 
a spirit as God wanted ? Did not God approve his 
acts ? If he was an evil spirit, how came he to be 
loafing around God's throne in heaven ? Does God 
keep evil spirits around his throne ? Finally, if to 
get himself out of a similar trouble, God should now 
command you to lie for him in a similar manner, 
would you, or would you not, obey that command ? 



30 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED . 

If you would obey it, would you, or would you not, 
regard your act of obedience as a wicked act, and 
yourself, in consequence of tliat act, as a wicked 
person ? If, on the other hand, you would not obey 
the command, would you not, in so doing, cease to 
be a Christian? Would you not become a rebel 
against God ? And would you not forfeit all hope of 
salvation ? Think of these things before you condemn 
that spirit ! 

You may object further that this affair involved 
a special miracle — that it was not the spirit, by his 
own power, that made the communications, but God, 
who made them through him. Very good. But this 
makes God himself do the lying. What a wonderful 
God you will soon have, if you keep on at this rate ! 
So far, however, from this being a special miracle 
wrought by himself, God did not even know, or, at 
least,' did not seem to know, what the spirit's pro- 
posed plans of operation were until he had inquired, 
and the spirit had informed him. If God himself 
had already planned this lying campaign, why should 
he have called on others to propose a plan ? And 
how could the spirit have known upon what plan he 
was to act, until God had informed him ? 

From the language of the text, it is evident that 
the spirit fully understood his own skill in lying and 
in making communications to men through spiritual 
mediums, and that he had his plans all fully matured 
before he offered to God his extremely valuable ser- 
vices. If he had not frequently practiced making 
communications to men, through spiritual mediums, 
how could he have so confidently proposed to God 
to make them, through so many different mediums, 



BY THE BIBLE. 31 

on the present occasion ? Since he did not ask of 
God any instructions in regard to the plan of this 
campaign, or any aid in carrying out that plan, and 
since God did not offer him either of these things, 
how dare yon assert that he needed, or that he 
received, either the one or the other ? And if he had 
power of his own to make such communications, 
what proofs have you that similar spirits, of the 
present time, have not the same power to make sim- 
ilar communications ? Is anything ever annihilated ? 
If not, is not the, power by which that spirit acted 
bound to be still in existence ? And does anything 
exist without a use ? If not, are we not bound to 
conclude that the power of spirits to communicate 
with men is still being exercised, and that spiritual 
communications are still being made ? 

In 2 Kings ii, 15, we read : " And when the sons of 
the prophets which were to view at Jericho saw him, 
they said, The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha." 
This was spoken after Elijah had entered the spirit 
world. Did his spirit, then, rest upon Elisha, and, 
through him as a medium, make prophetic communi- 
cations to men, or does the Bible stand convicted of 
falsehood ? 

In Job iv. 14-17, we read : "Fear came upon me, 
and trembling, which made all my bones to shake. 
Then a spirit passed before my face ; the hair of my 
flesh stood up : It stood still, but I could not discern 
the form thereof : an image was before mine eyes, 
there was silence, and I heard a voice saying, Shall 
mortal man be more just than God ? " Was the 
patient, the dignified, the eloquent old Job really a 
spiritual medium, and did he actually see a spirit, 



32 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

and hear it speak, as he says he did, or is his whole 
account of the affair an outrageous falsehood ? If he 
actually saw a spirit, and heard it speak, was not 
Spiritualism, in his day, an established fact? And 
was not Spiritualism, in this case, practiced by a good 
man and a good spirit ? Are you certain, then, that 
you do not lie when you so confidently assert that 
Spiritualism is of the devil ? Were Job and the good 
spirit in question serving the devil ? 

In 1 Sam. xxviii we learn that the spirit of Samuel 
appeared to a noted spiritual medium at Endor, and, 
through her, made some remarkable spiritual com- 
munications to Saul, king of Israel. Those who claim 
to be orthodox Christians call this medium a 
" witch," a " hag," etc., and often embellish their 
Bibles and other religious books with vile pictures of 
her — pictures which, in their vileness, are true reflec- 
tions of the persons in whose imaginations they are 
conceived. These zealous Christians take it for 
granted that the fact of this woman's communing 
with the spirit of Samuel, a man of God, was utterly 
damning, both to her character and to her beauty. 
The Bible, however, does not say a word against 
either her character or her beauty. It does not even 
intimate that she ever called up evil spirits or did 
anything else inconsistent with the character of a 
good and beautiful woman. Indeed, so far from call- 
ing her, as you do, by the foul nicknames, " witch," 
" hag," etc., the Bible describes her as a kind and 
noble-hearted woman. See the last five verses of this 
same chapter. We have nothing to do, however, with 
either her private character or her beauty. The 
only question with which we have to deal is, Did 



BY THE BIBLE. 33 

she, or did she not, call up the spirit of Samuel, or 
of any other person, and, from him, receive spiritual 
communications? The Bible says she did. "What 
do you say ? If she did actually receive spiritual 
communications, was not Spiritualism, in her day, 
an established fact ? And was the spirit of Samuel 
an evil spirit ? 

You will probably resort, as usual, to the special 
miracle evasion, and claim that God, on that partic- 
ular occasion, gave this woman power to do that 
which, at other times, she could not have done. So 
far from this being the case, however, her reputation 
for doing such things was well established before 
this event occurred. Indeed, it was her fame for 
skill in such things that induced Saul to consult her ; 
and, so far from having anything to do in the affair, 
God was not, at that time, on speaking terms with 
Saul. Besides this, if the woman had not well 
known her ability to call up spirits, would she so 
promptly and so confidently have undertaken to call 
up whomsoever Saul should name ? Could she have 
known that, through her, God was about to perform 
a special miracle ? Would you so confidently under- 
take to call up a spirit, believing, at the same time, 
that you could not do any such thing ? So far from 
claiming this as a special miracle, the Bible describes 
it simply as an ordinary historical event, and you 
have no right to claim as a miracle an event for which 
the Bible sets up no such claim. 

In Lev. xx, 27, we read : "A man also or a woman 
that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall 
surely be put to death." In Deut. xviii, 10, 11, we 
read : " There shall not be found among you a 



34 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits. ..." 
In 2 Kings xxi, 6, we learn that Manasseh " dealt 
with familiar spirits and wizards." You will notice 
that Manasseh is charged, not with attempting, or 
with pretending, to deal with familiar spirits, but 
with actually dealing with them. In the sixth verse 
of the next chapter we read : " And the soul that 
turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after 
wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set 
my face against that soul, and will cut him off from 
among his people." These passages, and scores more 
like them, all go to prove that, among the Hebrews, 
men actually could, and actually did, consult with 
spirits. Spiritualism, then, was an established fact. 

The last passage quoted shows plainly enough, too, 
that it was the abuse, and not the proper use, of 
Spiritualism that God condemned. The Hebrews, 
having always lived among an idolatrous people, were 
themselves extremely prone to idolatry. Many of 
them, therefore, went " a whoring " after familiar 
spirits, wizards, etc. ; that is, they idolatrously 
offered to these beings that worship which was due 
to God alone. Against those who practiced this form 
of idolatry the penalty of death was pronounced, and 
was, on many occasions, actually inflicted. 

The laws against consulting with familiar spirits 
were given by God himself, and were directed, not 
against those who tried, or who pretended, to consult 
with these spirits, but against those who actually 
did consult with them. When God gave these laws, 
did he, or did he not, believe that spirits could 
be called up, without his aid, and consulted? 
"Would he have enacted laws against things which he 



BY THE BIBLE. 35 

did not believe could be done? And if he believed 
that spirits could be called up and consulted, must 
not Spiritualism have been a fact ? Could God have 
been deceived in regard to these things ? Under the 
laws in question, many persons were found guilty, 
and were put to death. And would God, think you, 
have had persons executed for things which he knew 
that they could not do, and that they had not done ? 
In the Endor affair, which I have just noticed, you 
claimed that spirits could be called up and consulted 
only by the miraculous interposition of God's own 
power. If this claim be correct, then God had very 
severe laws enacted against the exercise of his own 
miraculous power. He also had vast numbers of 
innocent persons put to death, as criminals, in the 
most cruel manner, either for crimes which had never 
been committed at all, or for those which he himself 
had committed. In your mad war against Spiritual- 
ism, what kind of a being are you making of your God ? 
And what kind of a being are you also making of 
Jesus ? In the New Testament we learn that he and 
his disciples were almost daily engaged in casting 
out evil spirits. But, if spirits can be called up only 
by the interposition of God's miraculous power, how 
came those evil spirits in the men from whom Jesus 
and his disciples expelled them ? Did God call up 
those spirits and put them into men? If not, did 
Jesus, exercising God's almighty power, call them 
up? Of necessity, he must have done so, and all 
this simply that he might afflict men who had never 
injured him, and that he and his disciples might gain 
applause by casting out poor spirits, who never would 



36 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

have been in those men, had they not been called np 
and placed there by Jesus himself. 

With such facts as these before you, dare you 
longer deny that Spiritualism, just as we now teach 
it, did exist among God's chosen people ? Dare you 
longer deny that spirits were frequently called up 
and consulted, without the interposition of God's 
miraculous power ? Dare you assert that what was 
possible among the Jews, is impossible among us ? 
Dare you assert that what occurred so frequently 
among the Jews, never occurs at all among us ? Dare 
you assert that what was of God among the Jews, is 
of the devil among us ? If, since the times of which 
we are speaking, any barrier has been erected, to cut 
off all communication between our world and the 
world of spirits, will you be so kind as to inform us 
when that barrier was erected, where it was erected, 
why it was erected, how it was erected, and by whom 
it was erected ? "Will you also be so kind as to 
inform us how new-born spirits from earth manage 
to pass that barrier, on their way to heaven, when 
the passage is totally impracticable to older and more 
experienced spirits ? 

In Matt, xvii we read of four noted spiritual 
mediums, Jesus, Peter, James, and John, who called 
up, and conversed with, the spirits of two equally 
noted men, Moses and Elias. You dare not deny that 
this event actually occurred. You may claim, how- 
ever, that this was a special miracle, performed by 
the divine power of Jesus, and that men could never 
have thus called up and conversed with spirits. But 
have I not already proved that men did frequently 
thus call up spirits and consult with them ? Have I 



BY THE BIBLE. 37 

not also proved that to charge God with all that was 
ever done of this kind of work, would be to charge 
him with the horrible act of having multitudes of 
innocent persons put to death for crimes which he 
himself had committed ? Dare you bring against God 
so horribly blasphemous an accusation ? Besides 
this, what does Jesus himself say on the subject? 
"Yerily, verily, I say unto you, he that believe th on 
me, the works that I do shall he do also ; and greater 
works than these shall he do " (John xiv, 12). Call- 
ing up spirits, and conversing with them, was one of 
the most important works that Jesus did, and power 
to do this, and even greater works than this, he 
promises to those that believe on him. And are 
there, at the present time, any that believe on him? 
If there are, and if Jesus was not an impostor, are 
not those persons bound to possess, according to his 
promise, the power to call up spirits, and to perform 
all the other works that Jesus himself was wont to 
perform ? Deny this, if you dare ! 

In Mark xvi, 17, 18, Jesus says : " And these signs 
shall follow them that believe : In my name shall 
they cast out devils; they shall speak with new 
new tongues . . . they shall lay hands on the sick 
and they shall recover." This was spoken in the last 
meeting that Jesus held with his disciples on earth. 
In Matt, x, 8, Jesus gives his disciples the following 
commands : " Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise 
the dead, cast out devils : freely ye have received, 
freely give." In the last two verses of Matthew Jesus, 
in his final instructions to his disciples, recalls to 
their minds these commands, and all the others that 
he had ever given them, then instructs them to teach 



38 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

all nations to observe these things, and, finally, to 
encourage them in the discharge of all these duties, 
says: "And lo, I am with you alway, even unto the 
end of the world." 

From the last clause quoted, it is evident that the 
duties which were assigned to the disciples were 
assigned to them, not in their individual capacity, to 
cease at their death, but in their official, or repre- 
sentative, capacity, to continue, through their suc- 
cessors, " alway, even unto the end of the world." 
The same is also true of the signs that were to follow 
them that believe. Indeed, upon the ability to 
successfully perform the duties of healing the sick, 
casting out devils, raising the dead, etc., were to 
depend most of the signs that were to follow them 
that believe. Those duties, then, were assigned to 
all nations, and for all time. The signs, too — the suc- 
cessful accomplishment of these duties — were to 
fellow all of those that believe, of all nations, during 
all time, " even unto the end of the world." 

From all this, it is evident that the duties of heal- 
ing the sick, casting out devils, raising the dead, etc., 
are still just as binding upon " all nations " as they 
were at the first, upon the apostles themselves. The 
signs, too, which were to accompany these duties, or, 
rather, which were to consist in the ability to perform 
them, are all just as fully promised to those of the 
present time who believe on Jesus, as they were to 
the apostles themselves. The duties of healing the 
sick, etc., constituting, as they certainly did, the 
principal portion of the gospel which was commanded 
to be preached, were certainly intended to be as per- 
manent as the gospel of which they thus constituted 



BY THE BIBLE. 39 

so essential a part. If, then, it be still a duty to 
preach the gospel, it is certainly a duty to preach all 
those things which constitute the gospel. So of the 
signs in question ; they were to be inseparable from 
belief on Jesus. If, then, belief on Jesus is to con- 
tinue "alway, even unto the end of the world," so are 
these signs also, which were to accompany that belief, 
to continue for the same period. 

Since Jesus never imposed as a duty, upon his 
followers, anything impossible for them to perform, 
we may be sure that the duties of healing the sick, 
casting out devils, raising the dead, etc., were then, 
and are now, possible to " all nations," who were to 
be taught to observe these and all the other duties 
which Jesus had ever commanded his disciples to 
observe. But, in order that the duty of healing the 
sick might always remain possible, it was necessary 
that sickness should always remain among men. If 
there were no sick to be healed, it would be impossible 
to heal the sick. So of casting out devils. The per- 
formance of this duty would be impossible if there 
were no devils to be cast out. This duty being, as I 
have already shown, a permanent one, imposed on 
the followers of Jesus for all time, the existence of 
devils among men is bound to be equally permanent. 
But who and what are these devils ? Simply evil 
spirits — the spirits of bad men — spirits that get con- 
trol of many mediumistic persons, and use that 
control for evil purposes. All that I said of angels 
applies to these spirits, who are simply bad angels. 
To cast out these evil spirits, that is, to break up 
their improper control, is as much a duty now as it 
ever was ; and, to those who believe on Jesus, the 



40 SPIKITUALISM SUSTAINED 

performance of this duty is just as easy as it ever 
was. No man, be his pretensions what they ma}', 
who is either unwilling or unable to perform this 
duty, can justly claim to be a true believer on Jesus. 
And the raising of the dead, you ask, was this, too, 
imposed upon the followers of Jesus as a permanent 
duty? It certainly was. And can this duty still be 
performed ? With the utmost ease, by those who 
believe on Jesus. The performance of this duty is 
of almost daily occurrence in all countries, and all 
communities. This is especially the case among 
Spiritualists. Whenever they call up a spirit, they 
raise the dead ; and this is all the form of raising the 
dead that was ever enjoined, as a duty, upon the 
apostles or upon any others. To suppose, as most 
of you do, that, by the raising of the dead, we are to 
understand the revivifying of the bodies of the dead, 
is a great error. We are not required to raise the 
bodies of the dead, but to raise the dead themselves. 
Their bodies are merely their old habitations. 
In raising the dead we rarely have anything 
to do with these old habitations. Indeed, the 
body of a man, when once forsaken, is very rarely 
fit to be reinhabited, and when it is fit, it is 
rarely possible to restart to running the physical 
machinery of life. Since, then, the raising of the 
dead, in this manner, is so rarely possible, it could 
not have been enjoined upon all as a duty, nor could 
it have been promised as one of the signs that should 
certainly " follow them that believe." As I have 
already shown, however, the command to raise the 
dead, and the power to do so, are plainly given to 
every one " that believeth." The command, then, 



BY THE BIBLE. 41 

can mean nothing more nor less than the raising of 
the dead in their spiritual forms, as we Spiritualists 
are wont to raise them, for the purpose of consulting 
with them upon all subjects of interest to ourselves 
and to the world. In commanding us to raise the 
dead, in this manner, Jesus simply repealed, as he 
had both the power and the right to repeal, the 
law by which the Jews, on account of their idolatrous 
tendencies, had been forbidden to thus raise the 
dead. Jesus never violated the laws of his country, 
nor taught his followers to violate them ; and yet, in 
raising the dead — the spirits of Moses and Elias — in 
the manner of which I am speaking, he would have 
been guilty of a capital offense against the laws of 
his country, had the law against thus raising the dead 
been still in force. By thus repealing the law in 
question, Jesus brought men into full communion 
with the spirit- world, and made Spiritualism an 
essential element in Christianity. 

That my views are correct in regard to what Jesus 
meant by the raising of the dead, in the passages to 
which I have referred, is still further proved by a 
dialogue which took place between Abraham and a 
certain rich man who, it seems, had had the misfort- 
une to be sent to hell. In the course of this dialogue, 
which we find recorded in Luke xvi, 19-31, the rich 
man says : " I pray thee, therefore, father, that thou 
wouldst send him [Lazarus] to my father's house: for 
I have five brethren ; that he may testify unto them, 
lest they also come into this place of torment. 
Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the 
prophets ; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, 
father Abraham : but if one went unto them from the 



42 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

dead, they will repent. And lie said unto him, If 
they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will 
they be persuaded though one rose from the dead." 

I suppose that no one will claim that the dead 
body of Lazarus, which, even before death, was putrid 
with sores, was ever carried to Abraham's bosom. If, 
then, Lazarus had been sent back to earth, to the 
rich man's brethren, he would certainly have gone in 
his spiritual form, and his communications would 
certainly have been genuine spiritual communica- 
tions ; and yet this would have been what both the 
rich man and Abraham designated an arising from 
the dead. Both Abraham and the rich man seemed to 
regard this mode of arising from the dead as some- 
thing that could take place at any time. Abraham 
refused to have Lazarus thus arise from the dead, 
not because such an arising was impossible or 
improper, but simply because he regarded as utterly 
useless, if not improper, the errand on which the rich 
man wished Lazarus sent. And, under the circum- 
stances that surrounded them — being themselves both 
inhabitants of the realms of the dead — were not 
Abraham and the rich man both competent author- 
ities in regard to what constitutes an arising from 
the dead ? Jesus seems to think that they were. 

If, however, you still insist that, in commanding 
his disciples, and, through them, all nations, to raise 
the dead, Jesus meant for them to revivify the dead 
bodies of deceased men, what do you gain thereby, 
and what do you cause me to lose ? When the 
apostles and others raised the dead in this way, if, 
indeed, they ever did so, did they not, of necessity, 
call back the spirits of the dead from their new 



BY THE BIBLE. 43 

abodes in the world of spirits ? And if the apostles 
and other spiritual mediums could thus call back 
spirits for the purpose of having them re-enter their 
old tenements of clay, could not the same mediums 
just as easily call back the same spirits for any other 
purpose ? Was the presence of a dead body of any 
service either to the medium in calling the spirit 
back, or to the spirit in coming back ? Do you not 
perceive, then, that the raising of the dead in this 
form, as in all others, is a positive proof of the truth 
of Spiritualism? 

Tou object, however, that, even among the most 
aristocratic churches of the present time, none of 
those spiritual powers are to be found which Jesus 
promised to "them that believe." Very well. This 
simply proves that your most aristocratic churches 
are not composed of "them that believe." These 
churches are all man-made, pride-engendering, fash- 
ion-fostering institutions. They have nothing in 
common with Jesus. He did not know them. His 
promises were to " them that believe," and these are 
never to be found in those grand resorts of fashion 
and pride, your modern churches. Tou would better 
remonstrate with Jesus for thus neglecting your 
churches, and bestowing his spiritual gifts upon 
" them that believe " — upon the despised Spiritual- 
ists. Say to him : " My dear Jesus, such conduct 
will never do ! It will injure your popularity among 
the wealthy classes ! It will go to prove that the 
despised Spiritualists are your true believers, since 
they seem to be the only ones who possess the spiritual 
gifts which you promised to " them that believe." 
This condition of affairs cannot be permitted to con- 



44 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

tinue ; therefore, reform, Jesus, reform ! and come 
into our church ! " 

In 1 John iv, 1-3, we read : " Beloved, believe not 
every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of 
God . . . Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus 
Christ is come in the flesh is of God : and every 
spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come 
in the flesh is not of God." These instructions to 
" try the spirits " were given to men here on earth. 
But, in order to " try these spirits," according to 
these instructions, is it not absolutely necessary that 
the spirits be also here on earth, where we are, and 
that they communicate to us their opinions in regard 
to Jesus Christ ? And if this is not Spiritualism, 
what is it ? Better caution John to be a little more 
prudent in his language. Have him at least refrain 
from declaring that some of these communicating 
spirits are " of God." Have him denounce the whole 
thing as " of the devil." 

Paul devotes the entire twelfth chapter of 1 Cor. 
to a description of the various gifts that were to be 
possessed by the true followers of Jesus. Among 
these gifts he specifies those of healing diseases, of 
prophesying, of speaking in divers tongues, of per- 
forming miracles, of discerning spirits — of doing all 
those things which Spiritualists do, or, at least, pro- 
fess to do, at the present time. And these gifts were 
not to be the transient possessions of the believers 
of that age alone, but, as I have already shown, were 
to " follow them that believe," " alway, even unto the 
end of the world." Should not Paul be reproved for 
thus confirming the truths of Spiritualism ? 

From John's instructions to "try the spirits 



BY THE BIBLE. 45 

whether they are of God," etc., we learn that some of 
them " are of God," and that these communicate with 
men, confessing " that Jesus Christ is come in the 
flesh." How dare yon, then, assert that all spiritual 
manifestations are of the devil ? Nearly all of you 
do this whenever you are forced to admit the gen- 
uineness of the manifestations themselves. In doing 
this, however, you are simply doing what your 
models, the bigoted Jews, did in regard to similar 
manifestations produced through the mediumship of 
Jesus himself. " He hath a devil and is mad ; why 
hear ye him ? " " This fellow doth not cast out 
devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of devils." 
These and similar expressions were constantly being 
hurled at Jesus, because of the wonderful exhibitions 
of his mediumistic powers. And in your cruel war 
against Spiritualism, what have you thus far done 
but use the very same language which the orthodox 
churchmen of his time used against his spiritualism ? 

When Jesus approached them, walking on the 
water, his disciples at once believed it to be a spirit. 
Could they have believed this unless they had been 
believers in Spiritualism ? In his comments on this 
passage, Dr. Clarke says : " That the spirits of the 
dead might and did appear, was a doctrine held by 
the greatest and holiest men that ever existed ; and 
a doctrine which the cavillers, free-thinkers and 
bound-thinkers, of different ages have never been able 
to disprove." And are you prepared to condemn 
" the greatest and the holiest men that ever existed ? " 
If you are, then I would rather fall with them than 
stand with you. 

When Peter stood rapping on the door of the 



46 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

house in which the disciples and others were holding 
a prayer-meeting, they at once believed it to be a 
spirit rapping — Peter's spirit, come to them as an 
angel from the prison, in which they knew he had 
been confined, and in which they, naturally enough, 
supposed he had been put to death. Dr. Clarke and 
many other able writers concur in this view. If the 
disciples had not been believers in Spiritualism, 
could they have thus believed that it was a spirit 
whose rappings they heard, and whose form was vis- 
ible at the door? In other words, could they have 
believed that these were phenomena in the existence 
of which they, at the same time, did not believe? 
When they believed that a spirit was at that very 
moment rapping on their door, were they, or were 
they not, believers in spirit rappings ? Are you not 
bound to admit that they were as thorough believers 
in Spiritualism as are any of us at the present day ? 
You will doubtless object, however, that, in this 
instance, it was not a spirit that appeared and that 
produced the rappings upon the door. Very well. 
This is so much the better for my argument. I did 
not introduce this case to prove that a spirit did 
appear, but to prove that the apostles were firm 
believers in the phenomena of Spiritualism. Had 
they been unbelievers in these phenomena, they 
would not have been expecting any such phenomena, 
and would certainly have been greatly astonished if 
a spirit had made its appearance and had rapped 
upon their door. As it was, however, the case was 
exactly the opposite of this. They were astonished, 
not because it was, but because it was not a spirit 
that made its appearance and rapped upon their 



BY THE BIBLE. 47 

door. Had it proved to be a spirit, as tlieir faith in 
such phenomena easily led them to believe that it 
was, they would not have been in the least astonished. 
They were doubtless accustomed to spiritual mani- 
festations, especially at their seances or prayer 
meetings, and were evidently expecting some such 
manifestations on the present occasion. Hence, when 
Peter made his appearance, in the manner described, 
they all, at once, believed it to be that which, more 
than anything else, they were expecting. They 
believed it to be a spirit, coming to them as an 
" angel," or messenger, and making known its arrival, 
as they evidently were expecting it would, by rappings 
upon the door or upon some other object. So much 
more probable did they believe it to be that a spirit 
would make its appearance, in the manner described, 
than that Peter, in the bod}-, should thus make his 
appearance, that they could hardly be made to 
believe that it was indeed he, and not an " angel," 
or spirit messenger. 

With all these plain facts before you, dare you 
longer deny that the apostles were firm believers in 
those spiritual phenomena upon which Spiritualism 
is founded ? And can you condemn Spiritualists, on 
account of their belief, without condemning the 
apostles for holding the same belief ? If the belief 
of the apostles in Spiritualism was founded in either 
ignorance or error, can you show any good reason 
why the same may not be equally true of all the other 
doctrines in which they believed, and in which you 
follow them ? Have we not their authority as fully 
for Spiritualism as you have it for any of your doc- 
trines? And is not that authority worth as much in 



48 SPIKITUALISM SUSTAINED 

our case as it is in yours ? Shall we accept it, then, 
in both cases, or reject it in both ? We cannot accept 
it in the one case, and reject it in the other. 

Were it necessary to do so, I could still go on 
indefinitely, and, from the Bible, pile up proof upon 
proof of the truth of Spiritualism, and of its accepta- 
bility in the sight of heaven. More proof, however, is 
unnecessary. I will, therefore, briefly recapitulate 
my arguments, and then close. 

1. I have proved that Spiritualism, substantially 
as we now teach it, prevailed throughout the entire 
period covered by Biblical history. 

2. I have proved that angels are human beings, and 
that all the transactions of angelic spirits with men 
are phenomena pertaining to Spiritualism. 

3. I have proved that spirits, whether they ever 
become angels or not, certainly do become as the 
angels, and equal unto them. In proving this, I have 
proved that human spirits have power to appear unto 
men, to communicate with them, and to do all other 
things that can be done by angels. 

4. I have proved that Abraham, Jacob, Job, Man- 
oah, and many others of the greatest and best men of 
the Bible were Spiritualists and good mediums. 

5. I have proved that God approved Spiritualism, 
in its legitimate uses, and that he often had men 
practice it. 

6. I have proved that Jesus and the apostles were 
all Spiritualists and good mediums ; that they prom- 
ised that these Spiritual phenomena, as signs, should 
follow the true believers in Christianity, "alway, 
even unto the end of the world," and that they 
imposed upon their followers, of all nations and of 



BY THE BIBLE. 49 

all ages, certain duties which cannot possibly be 
performed except through the instrumentality of 
Spiritualism. 

7. I have proved that, if you deny my arguments, 
you make God a liar, and make him have multitudes 
of innocent persons put to death for crimes com- 
mitted by himself. 

8. I have proved that Spiritualism rests upon the 
same authority as do the fundamental doctrines of 
the Christian religion, and that if this authority be 
worthless in the one case, it is bound to be equally 
worthless in the other. 

9. Finally, I have proved that, in order to over- 
throw Spiritualism, you must prove that the Bible is 
false, and that Jesus and the apostles were liars. 
What more proof do you want? 



LECTURE II. 

SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 

In proving the truths of Spiritualism,, by the Bible, 
as I did in my last lecture, I addressed my arguments 
to those persons only who profess to have full faith 
in the truth of all the teachings of that book. To 
these persons I did not consider any defense of the 
Bible necessary ; and, with my present views of the 
Bible, I could not consistently have made any defense 
of it, even had I considered a defense necessary. 
Regarding myself as counsel for Spiritualism in the 
suit brought against it in the great court of the world, 
by the Christian priesthood of the present time and 
their followers, and preferring to win the cause of 
my client on the exclusive testimony of the plaintiff's 
witnesses, I simply regarded the Bible as their most 
important witness, and, in the cross-examination, I 
elicited testimony so damaging to their cause that 
they will be compelled either to abandon the suit or 
to impeach the testimony of this their principal wit- 
ness. So, in my present lecture, I shall treat the 
Christian Church as one of the plaintiff's principal 
witnesses. I shall accept as truth all that this unwill- 
ing witness testifies in favor of Spiritualism, and 
shall thus, as in the case of the Bible, throw the 
burden of denial on the plaintiffs themselves. And, 
whether they admit or deny the testimony of this 



SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED BY THE CHUKCH. 51 

witness and that of their former witness, the Bible, 
their case is hopelessly lost. 

The doings and the teachings of Jesns and his 
disciples are the last things recorded in Biblical his- 
tory, and the first things recorded in the history of 
the Christian Church. These persons, therefore, 
belong both to Biblical and to post-Biblical times. 
Their testimony, then, is of the highest importance, 
whether we regard them as noted men of the Bible, 
or as the founders of the Christian Church. In my 
last lecture I had them, as characters of the Bible, 
give the most positive testimony in support of the 
truth of Spiritualism. I will now recall them to the 
witness-stand, and have them, as the highest author- 
ities of the Christian Church, continue their testimony 
so damaging to the cause of the opposers of Spirit- 
ualism. 

In Heb. i, 14, Paul, in speaking of angels, says : 
" Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to 
minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation ? " 
From this we learn that all the angels are ministering 
spirits — that is, spirits employed as ministers or 
messengers. "With equal truth it might also be said 
that all ministering spirits are angels. In my last 
lecture I proved that the term angel means nothing 
more nor less than messenger, or ministering spirit. 
I proved that it is office or occupation, and that 
alone, which constitutes a man an angel, just as it is 
office or occupation, and that alone, which constitutes 
a man a soldier, a magistrate, or a manufacturer. No 
one, therefore, be his origin and nature what they 
may, can be an angel, unless he be occupied, in some 
way, as a messenger or a minister ; and, conversely, 



52 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

no one, be his origin and nature what they may, can 
be thus occupied without becoming, during the con- 
tinuance of that occupation, an angel. From this, it 
is clear that an angel ceases to exist as such the 
moment the office expires, or the occupation ceases, 
which constituted him an angel, just as a soldier, a 
magistrate, or a manufacturer ceases to exist as such 
the moment he retires from the office, or the occupa- 
tion, that constituted him such. An angel could no 
more exist as such, without employment to constitute 
him such, than a current of water could exist as such 
without motion to constitute it a current. As the 
loss of motion destroys a current as such, and reduces 
it to mere water, so the loss of employment destroys 
an angel as such, and reduces him to a mere man, or 
to an ordinary spirit. From this it is clear that 
an individual may be a mere man, or an ordinary 
spirit, to-day, and an angel to-morrow ; or an angel 
to-day, and a mere man, or an ordinary spirit, to- 
morrow. The whole matter depends upon how he 
may be employed. 

In my last lecture I proved that many, if not all, 
of the angels who exist in the form of spirits are 
neither more nor less than human beings who have 
laid aside the mortal form. Since, then, this entire 
class of angels are " all ministering spirits, sent forth 
to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation," 
these human spirits are bound to be among those 
thus " sent forth." How else, indeed, could human 
spirits be — as Jesus declares that they are — " as the 
angels which are in heaven," and " equal unto them ?" 

But why is it, you ask, that you receive no spiritual 
manifestations, or angelic ministrations, of any kind? 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 53 

Simply because you are not one of those to whom 
these things were promised. What right have you 
to expect any such things ? These spiritual minis- 
trations were promised only to " them that believe," 
and to "them who shall be heirs of salvation." 
You belong to a very different class of persons. You 
deny the very signs by which, alone, the divinity of 
Jesus can be established — the very signs by which, 
alone, his presence among the people can be made 
known. In thus denying that these signs do follow 
"them that believe," you make liars of Jesus and the 
apostles, who promised these signs to all true 
believers. In thus denying the only proofs there 
ever were of the divinity of Jesus, you reduce him to 
the unenviable condition of an impostor. In this 
way you accomplish more than has ever been accom- 
plished by the boldest of Infidels. 

No matter, then, how prominent you may be as 
members of fashionable orthodox churches — no matter 
how long may be your faces, your coat-tails, or your 
prayers — no matter how loud may be your denuncia- 
tions of those who reject your dogmas — you are not 
of "them that believe," and, hence, cannot be of 
" them who shall be heirs of salvation." And can 
you expect to enjoy spiritual gifts and spiritual min- 
istrations in the existence of which you do not 
believe ? Is it not evident that you are of that class 
to whom, on account of their unbelief, Jesus promised 
damnation ? And would it not be well for you to 
ascertain just what damnation is, and commence pre- 
paring for it? 

In Heb. xi Paul recounts a long list of patriarchs, 
prophets, martyrs, and other worthies, who had 



54 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

departed this life, from the righteous Abel down to 
those who had died in his own time ; then, referring 
to all these departed persons — these spirits — in a 
body, he opens the next chapter as follows : " Where- 
fore, seeing we also are compassed about with so 
great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every 
weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, 
and let us run with patience the race that is set 
before us." 

Since the persons to whom Paul here refers had 
all passed through the change called death, they 
were certainly all spirits at the time the great apostle 
used this language. If Paul tells the truth, then 
human spirits, in his time, did, like a great cloud, 
compass about men still in the body, and did witness 
all their actions. And is not this a positive proof of 
the truth of Spiritualism in one of its grand, its 
glorious, its heaven-attested and heaven-approved 
phases ? 

To render this proof still stronger Paul proceeds, 
farther on in the same chapter, to enumerate several 
material objects, such as mountains, fire, trumpets, 
etc., and declares that unto these things "ye are not 
come." Then, in contrast with these material objects, 
he continues : " But ye are come unto Mount Sion, 
and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly 
Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 
to the general assembly and church of the first-born, 
which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge 
of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 
and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant . . ." 

Paul does not predict that, after death, ye shall 
come unto all these things, in some far away and 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHUBCH. 55 

indefinite place, but historically declares that now 
and here, " ye are come unto " them. Where, then, 
were those spirits, those angels, etc., bound to be in 
order to be thus " come unto " by men still on earth 
and still in the body ? Were not those spirits, etc., 
bound to be also here on earth ? Could men have 
thus " come unto" them, if they had been, where you 
now place them, far away from earth, in some 
unknown direction, and in some undiscoverable por- 
tion of infinite space ? And how could that " in- 
numerable company of angels," and of " the spirits 
of just men made perfect," have " compassed about " 
those men, like " so great a cloud of witnesses," 
without being present where those men were ? 

Paul speaks of the presence of " angels," and of 
"the spirits of just men made perfect," of "so 
great a cloud of witnesses," as a fact fully accepted 
by the Hebrews, whom he urges, on account of the 
presence of such witnesses, to cultivate purity of 
heart and of life. Unless, then, you can prove that 
Paul taught, and that the Hebrews believed, a mon- 
strous lie, you are bound to admit that, in those 
days, " the spirits of just men made perfect " were 
present, as witnesses, round about men still in the 
body. And where are those spirits now ? Have 
they, since Paul's time, been banished from earth ? 
If not, are they not still present, like a great cloud, 
witnessing the actions of men? If they have been 
banished, will you be so kind as to inform us 
when they were banished, why they were banished, 
how their banishment was carried into effect, and in 
what particular portion of infinite space they now 
are ? If you cannot give us this information, does 



56 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

not Spiritualism stand fully established and fully 
approved ? Can you, without the aid of Spiritualism, 
prove that there is any spirit world at all, or that 
man has any conscious existence beyond the change 
called death ? 

What ideas of heaven and of hell do you now teach 
that were not borrowed from the ancient pagans ? 
Those pagans taught that the earth was stationary in 
the center of the universe, and that what we call the 
sky was a solid structure or firmament placed, like a 
hollow sphere, around the earth, or, rather, like an 
inverted bowl, over the earth. On the upper or con- 
vex side of this inverted bowl they located the home 
of their gods, and of their departed heroes and other 
great men. And do you not teach this same pagan 
heaven to-day ? What other heaven have you ? And 
what are you but pagans ? 

To those pagans up meant a definite and unchange- 
able direction. To them it was clear that two 
persons, starting up from the same point, the one at 
noon, the other at midnight, would travel in the same 
direction, and on the same straight line, and would 
reach the firmament, or inverted bowl, at the same 
point. Those pagans, then, very consistently placed 
their heaven on the upper side of this firmament. At 
any rate, it was perfectly safe to place heaven up 
there, since no one, in those times, was able to prove 
that it was not there. Modern science, however, has 
now entirely dissipated the firmament or solid sky on 
which that heaven was located ; and the disappear- 
ance of that firmament necessitated the disappearance 
of the heaven that rested upon it. In other words, 
it is now fully demonstrated that no such firmament, 



BY THE CHEISTIAN CHURCH. 57 

no such heaven, ever existed at all. And yet this 
utterly dissipated heaven of the benighted old pagans 
is the only heaven of the orthodox Christians of 
to-day. If your heaven be not now, as of old, 
stationary above a stationary earth — above the 
firmament — the immovable blue sky, where is it, and 
what is -it ? Dare you even attempt to answer these 
fair questions ? 

Because you can do no better, you still teach that 
heaven, the dwelling-place of God, of angels, and of 
" the spirits of just men made perfect," is up ; and 
this vague teaching satisfies the ignorant and un- 
thinking masses among us, just as it satisfied the 
same class of persons among the ancient pagans. 
Intelligent persons, however, cannot thus be satisfied, 
and every minister of the gospel, who has sufficient 
intelligence to be successful in his profession, knows 
very well that, in teaching this vague doctrine, he is 
binding upon the minds of the people a remnant of 
old pagan mythology, founded in an utter ignorance 
of the true structure of the universe. Ministers of 
this class are true shepherds. They feed their sheep 
upon the mythological stuff which I have been 
describing, simply because the sheep like it, and 
because, while feeding upon it, they make the finest 
yield to the shepherds, of wool and of mutton. These 
intelligent shepherds have an eye only to the profits. 
They themselves never think of swallowing a morsel 
of the stuff upon which they feed their sheep. A 
minister of the gospel who is sufficiently ignorant — 
and there are many such — to believe what he 
preaches, is far too ignorant to ever become eminently 
successful in his profession. Such a minister is like 



58 SPIKITUALISM SUSTAINED 

a real shepherd who would undertake to eat real 
fodder with his real sheep — he is a failure. 

Intelligent ministers of the gospel take no stock 
themselves in the mythological heaven which they 
preach. Like all other skilful manipulators of 
worthless stock, they sell all the shares they can, and 
at as high figures as they can, but they never invest 
their own money in any such stock. For the benefit 
of the ignorant, upon whom they chiefly depend for 
their converts and their salaries, they still teach, as 
I have already stated, that heaven is up in what is 
called the sky. In other words, they still teach the 
old mythological heaven of the pagans, without any 
change except in regard to the number of gods said 
to dwell up there. 

But what does up mean? Simply outward from 
the center of the earth, indefinitely, in all directions. 
Up is only a relative term. Up, to one man or one 
locality, may be down to another man or another 
locality. Up, at one hour of the day, may be, and 
actually is, down at another hour of the day. Your 
spirits, then, starting out, at the same moment, from 
different points on the earth's surface, or at different 
moments, from the same point, and going upward to 
find heaven, would depart from the earth in different 
directions, and on constantly diverging lines. Trav- 
eling thus, with the speed of light, through all the 
ages of eternity, no two of them would ever meet, 
and no one of them would ever find your fabled 
heaven. 

Through our great telescopes we now look forth in 
all directions to regions so distant that light, passing 
from them to the earth, reaches it only after a jour- 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 59 

ney of a hundred thousand years. Scattered through- 
out this whole immeasurable expanse, we find worlds 
without number, all having physical constitutions 
and plrysical laws similar to those of our own world. 
Nowhere do. we find a spot better fitted to be a heaven 
to the inhabitants of the earth than is earth herself. 
Space is everywhere the same. The firmament — the 
great inverted blue bowl, upon which the mytholog- 
ical heaven of the pagans and of the Christians 
rested — is found to have no existence. The blue is 
merely the color of the atmosphere which surrounds 
us, and does not exist except near the earth's surface. 
The sun, the moon, and the stars, which, to keep 
them from falling down upon the earth, both pagans 
and Christians had " set," or stuck, like nails, into 
the under side of their firmament, are found to be 
freely revolving in space. Every vestige of your 
heaven disappears. 

From all this it is evident that earth herself must 
afford all the heaven there is for us, earth's children. 
Indeed, heaven, of necessity, consists in condition, 
and not in location. On any other hypothesis you find 
yourselves involved in difficulties and absurdities 
from which no amount of sophistry will ever enable 
you to extricate yourselves. Why, then, persist in 
the worse than pagan attempt to locate your heaven 
at a distance from earth, far out in space, you know 
not where ? Why continue to banish the spirits of 
the righteous afar from those they love, near whom 
they would like to remain, and to whom, by their 
angelic ministrations, they might do much good ? Is 
distance from earth essential to happiness ? If it is, 
does the happiness increase directly as the distance, 



60 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

or as the square of the distance ? Give me the rule, 
and tell me exactly how far your heaven is from 
earth, and I will tell you exactly how many times 
happier you would be there than jon would be on 
the top of Mount Washington. Indeed, I could even 
tell you how much happier you would be in the 
garret of an eight-story building than you would be 
on the first floor. 

Do any of you really believe that God actually does 
thus carry away and imprison the spirits of the 
righteous ? Do you really believe that he actually 
does prevent even the pious mother from revisiting 
her darling babes, and shielding them, by her angelic 
presence, from the evil influences of the legions of 
devils whom your priests blasphemously charge him 
with having deliberately made and turned loose to 
ruin mankind ? Could any place, however distant it 
might be from earth, ever be a heaven to such a 
mother, while she knew that devils were in her old 
home, leading her poor, dear children down to the 
unutterable torments of a never-ending hell ? If not 
permitted, at such times, to go to her children, would 
not your heaven become to her a place of intolerable 
torment ? And what kind of a being do you make of 
your God by these your blasphemous teachings ? 

How much more beautiful than all this, how much 
more glorious, how much more honorable to God, 
are the teachings of Spiritualism, which have us, 
while }-et in the body, " compassed about with so 
great a cloud of witnesses," with " an innumerable 
company of angels," and with "the spirits of just 
men made perfect ! " And what could more power- 
fully influence men to purity of thought and of life 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 61 

than the known presence of snch glorified beings ? 
Many of these were once the idols of our own loving 
hearts, the lights of our own happy homes. Our 
parents, our brothers, our sisters, our children, glori- 
fied beyond the power of words to express, but none 
the less dear, they come to us now in their robes of 
snow — on their wings of light. " Compassed about 
with so great a cloud of witnesses," we can do no 
wicked act, indulge in no wicked thought. The 
sorrows of earth are forgotten, joy unspeakable 
thrills our bosoms, and we long to become like the 
loved, the beautiful, the glorified beings around us. 
Oh ! how great an incentive to purity of heart and oi 
life — how great a source of joy unutterable — is lost 
to you by your mad rejection of these beautiful 
teachings of the Bible and of Spiritualism ! 

In Matt, xxvii, 52, 53, we read : " And the graves 
were opened, and many bodies of the saints which 
slept arose, and came out of the graves after his 
resurrection, and went into the holy city, and 
appeared unto many." Now turning to 1 Cor. xv, 
42-44, we learn from Paul the nature of the body 
with which a saint arises : ' It is sown in corruption, 
it is raised in incorruption ; it is sown in dishonor, 
it is raised in glory ; it is sown in weakness, it is 
raised in power ; it is sown a natural body, it is raised 
a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there 
is a spiritual body." In the thirty-fifth verse we 
read : " But some man will say, How are the dead 
raised up ? and with what body do they come ? " 
From this we learn that the raising up of the dead, 
and their coming with bodies, are events, not of the 
future, but of the present time. The question is not 



62 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

how will the dead be raised tip at some far distant 
and indefinite period of the future, and with what 
bodies will they come ? but how are they raised up 
now, and with what bodies do they now come ? 

Paul proceeds to answer these questions at length, 
and together with much more, all tending to convey 
the same ideas, uses the language which I first quoted. 
In all that he says upon the subject he speaks of the 
sowing of the natural body, and of the raising up of 
the spiritual body, as of events both of which occur 
equally in the present time. As the new grain, by a 
law of its being, is quickened, and caused to proceed 
from the old grain when the latter dies, and as an 
immediate consequence of its dying, so, as Paul beau- 
tifully explains, the new, or spiritual body, by a 
similar law of its being, is quickened, in like manner, 
and caused to proceed from the old body, when the 
latter dies, and as an immediate consequence of its 
dying. With equal propriety the great apostle might 
have continued this wonderfully beautiful comparison 
by saying that, as the new grain, when once quick- 
ened and separated from the old, never again needs 
that old and lifeless grain, and never again returns 
to it; so the new — the spiritual — body, when once 
quickened and separated from the old, never again 
needs that old and lifeless body, and never again 
returns to reinhabit it. When once dead, both the 
old grain and the old body are resolved into their 
original elements, which are then free to enter into 
new combinations — into the forms of plants, of ani- 
mals, etc. 

Prom all this it is clear that those saints "which 
arose, . . . went into the holy city, and appeared 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 63 

unto many " were simply spirits in snch bodies as 
spirits possess. Indeed, with any other than spiritual 
bodies, they could not have been "as the angels 
which are in heaven," as Jesus declares that saints 
are in the resurrection. The bodies of those saints 
were not the gross material bodies which they had 
once inhabited. Those bodies had returned to dust, 
and the dust, or portions of it, at least, had probably 
entered into the composition of other human bodies. 
There is no authentic record of any instance in which 
a human body, after undergoing decomposition, has 
ever been recomposed, or reinhabited ; and the Bible 
does not even intimate that any such event will ever 
occur. Such a recomposition, indeed, would be 
simply a new creation, which could just as easily be 
performed upon matter which had never, as yet, 
entered into the composition of a human body. 

Notwithstanding all these indisputable facts, how- 
ever, some of you, from mere force of habit, will 
doubtless contend that those saints appeared in the 
very same old fleshly bodies which they had once 
inhabited, and which, after their death, had crumbled 
to dust in the grave. Admitting that this your totally 
unwarranted assumption be correct, did those saints 
come forth from their graves naked, and go thus 
"into the holy city," or were they clothed? If 
clothed, where did they get their clothes, and how 
did they manage to pay for them? "Were their old 
clothes resurrected as well as their old bodies ? If 
so, why do you not preach the resurrection of old 
clothes as well of old bodies ? If their old clothes 
were not resurrected at the same time with their old 
bodies, then, of necessity, those saints must have 



64 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

come forth from their graves naked, and must, in 
that utterly destitute condition, have entered " into 
the holy city, and appeared unto many." And what 
finally became of them ? Did they procure clothes, 
resume their old occupations, and afterwards die for 
the second time, or did they, all naked as they then 
were, strike right out up to your imaginary heaven ? 
That they remained among men, and suffered death 
a second time, you will hardly venture to assert. Of 
necessity, then, we have before us the strange spec- 
tacle of a whole troop of naked saints, with material 
bodies just like our own, mounting up in the air, 
trying to reach your heaven. But how high could 
saints, with such bodies, get, without ladders, and 
how could they, thus naked, endure the intense cold 
of the upper regions ? Besides all this, those saints 
would meet with 'another very serious difficulty. The 
earth is known to move forward in her orbit at a rate 
of motion sixty times greater than that of a cannon 
ball. Unless, then, your heaven be connected with 
the earth, and accompany her in her journey around 
the sun, it is evident that the moment those saints, 
in starting to heaven, took their feet off the ground 
the earth would pass from under them, leaving them 
far behind in her wake, dangling in space, with 
nothing to guide them in their new and perilous 
journey. How supremely ridiculous your pagan 
teachings become in the light of modern science ! 

Without involving all these and many more similar 
absurdities, those saints could have been nothing else 
than spirits. That they actually were spirits is also 
fully made apparent by the phraseology of the lan- 
guage used in describing them. It is not said of 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 65 

them that they were seen by many, but that they 
" appeared unto many." The verb " appeared," being 
in the active voice, shows that it was, by an action or 
effort, on their own part, that those saints became 
visible to men. Had they possessed material bodies, 
like ours, visible at all times, no effort on their own 
part would have been necessary in order to render 
themselves visible. In that case it would not have 
been proper to say of them that they " appeared." 
They would have been passive objects of vision, and 
it would have been said of them that they were seen. 
In speaking of material objects, such as men, dogs, 
horses, etc., we always say that we have seen them, 
never that they have " appeared unto " us. In 
speaking of ethereal objects, however, such as spirits, 
we may, very properly, say that they have " appeared 
unto " us. In its active sense, as used in the text, 
the verb appear is used only in connection with 
objects which are usually invisible, and which, when 
they do appear, are called apparitions. In this 
active sense men, in material bodies, never appear, 
and hence they are never called apparitions. This is 
the very sense, however, in which spirits do appear, 
and hence they are always called apparitions. Previous 
to the time alluded to the saints in question had been 
invisible. Then, as apparitions, they suddenly " ap- 
peared unto many." Then again, as is usual with 
apparitions, they just as suddenly disappeared. 
Beyond all question, then, they were spirits in spirit- 
ual bodies ; and the many unto whom they appeared 
were seeing mediums. 

In this affair I have now made out a clear case 
of the reappearance of the dead, in the form of spirits. 



Q6 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

This event occurred after the resurrection of Jesus. 
Since, then, in rising from the dead and reappearing 
unto men, Jesus became " the first fruits of them that 
slept," we have an assurance that all who have slept 
in death are empowered to thus rise up and reappear. 
And now, let me ask, if, with your present views, 
you had lived at the time of which I am speaking, 
would you have believed the report of the " many " 
who professed to have witnessed the reappearance, 
in spirit form, of those departed saints ? Or, if those 
same persons were living now, and were to make a sim- 
ilar report, would you believe their report ? If not — 
if you would not believe it, though received directly 
from the witnesses themselves — how can you believe it 
at all ? If the story, direct from the lips of the wit- 
nesses, was unworthy of credit, can it have become 
worthy by reaching us, as it does, through hearsay 
handed down to us through numberless copyings and 
translations ? Do we know anything of the character 
for skill and honesty of the copyists, the translators, 
and the priests through whose hands the story has 
reached us ? If, however, in regard to such a matter, 
you would receive the report of a set of Jews totally 
unknown to you, if you do receive that report, as it 
reaches us through a thousand doubtful channels, 
how can you so promptly reject the direct testimony 
to the same effect of still greater numbers of the 
most truthful and intelligent persons of the present 
time ? Do you not perceive that in thus accepting 
the weaker and rejecting the stronger testimony you 
are acting very inconsistently ? Be all this as it may, 
however, you accept the story as it reaches us, and 
in this story we have positive evidence, not only of 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 67 

tlie truth of Spiritualism, but also of the fact that it 
was employed by heaveu ou this occasion to give 
additional grandeur, solemnity, and significance to 
the resurrection of Jesus, and to the ushering in of 
the Christian Dispensation. 

All this is equally true, no matter in what kind of 
bodies those saints reappeared. In order to reappear 
at all, they had, of course, to return to earth from 
the place of their abode in the world of spirits. In 
order to know when to return, to what place, and in 
what manner, the spirits of those saints had equally, 
of course, to be fully cognizant of all that was trans- 
piring on earth. Since, then, the laws of our being 
never change, it is evident that by whatever laws 
those saints, while in spirit life, were then enabled 
to know what was transpiring on earth, and to 
reappear to men, by the same laws, they must still 
be enabled to know the same things and to reappear 
in the same manner. You are bound to admit, there- 
fore, all the teachings of Spiritualism, or else deny 
that spirits ever did reappear on that or on any other 
occasion. 

In Luke xxiv, 37, we read : " But they were terri- 
fied and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen 
a spirit." This is spoken of the disciples of Jesus 
on the occasion of his first reappearance to them 
after his resurrection. You will doubtless claim, 
however, that on this occasion the disciples were 
deceived ; that what they mistook for a spirit was not 
a spirit at all, and that consequently this case does 
nothing to establish the truth of Spiritualism. Ad- 
mitting, however, that on this particular occasion 
they were deceived, I still prove that the disciples 



68 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

were all firm believers in Spiritualism. They firmly 
believed that what they saw was a spirit making its 
appearance unto them. Could they have believed 
this if they had not believed that spirits could and 
did thus appear to men ? And is the firm faith of 
these men worth nothing ? Were they likely to adopt 
a belief on insufficient evidence ? If they were, then 
probably all those beliefs in which you follow them 
were adopted on insufficient evidence. If, in regard 
to Spiritualism, they erred, have we any assurance 
that they did not equally err in regard to the whole 
subject of Christianity ? Were they any more liable 
to err in the former case than in the latter? And are 
you going to condemn them for their belief in Spirit- 
ualism just as you condemn us for the same belief ? 
If in them that belief was no crime, can it be a crime 
in us? 

Be this as it may, however, are you prepared to 
prove that the belief of the disciples in the power 
of spirits to appear unto men was an erroneous 
belief ? They made a mistake, you say, on this occa- 
sion in supposing that a certain person was a spirit, 
when he was not. But does this one mistake — if it 
was a mistake — prove that spirits are never seen at 
all ? If I make a mistake in supposing that a certain 
object is a horse, when, in fact, it is some other kind 
of animal, does my one mistake prove that horses 
never can be seen at all? Your argument proves 
nothing, and if it did — if it fully established the fact 
that the apostles did entertain and teach erroneous 
doctrines — would not your proof be as fatal to Chris- 
tianity as to Spiritualism ? 

If, in regard to the power of spirits to appear unto 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 69 

men, the apostles had been in error, would not Jesus 
have corrected that error ? Can it be possible that 
he, too, fell into an error in regard to this matter ? 
Be this as it may, so far from even intimating that 
the apostles held erroneous views in regard to this 
matter, he proceeds to confirm their views by speak- 
ing of the appearance of spirits, the nature of their 
bodies, etc., as of things with which he supposes them 
to be fully acquainted. He further confirms their 
views by calling their attention to several points in 
which he differs, or, at least, seems to differ, from a 
spirit. Thus you see that, even admitting that Jesus 
was not at that time a spirit, I make a strong case in 
favor of the truth of Spiritualism. 

But upon what authority do you base your asser- 
tion that, at the time referred to, Jesus was not a 
spirit ? Did he say that he was not ? On the con- 
trary, when not perverted to sustain some man-made 
creed, his peculiar phraseology shows clearly that 
he was a spirit, and that he wished his disciples to 
have a correct knowledge of him as such. When he 
saw them affrighted at his sudden appearance in 
their midst, when he perceived the conflicting 
thoughts that arose in their minds concerning his 
identity, his present nature, etc., " he said unto them, 
Why are ye troubled ? and why do thoughts arise in 
your hearts ? Behold my hands and my feet that it 
is I myself : handle me, and see, for a spirit hath not 
flesh and bones, as ye see me have." As to whether 
he was a spirit or not there seems to have been no 
question in the minds of the disciples. From the 
moment of his appearance among them they were 
satisfied in regard to this matter. That he was a 



70 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

spirit they did not doubt. Without having been 
visible as he approached them, he suddenly " stood 
in the midst of them." They knew that no one but 
a spirit, a genuine apparition, could have appeared 
in that manner. Seeing that they were correct in 
recognizing him as a spirit, Jesus said nothing to 
them in regard to that matter. Had they erred, 
however, in that respect, he certainly would have 
corrected their error. 

The only questions in their minds were in regard 
to his identity and to the nature of his spiritual body. 
The question in regard to his identity he settled by 
the showing of his hands and his feet ; that in regard 
to the nature of his body by having his disciples 
handle him. It was of the .utmost importance that 
these two questions should be correctly settled in the 
minds of the apostles ; that concerning his identity 
in order that through their teachings the world 
might know that he did, in very deed, arise from the 
dead ; that concerning the nature of his body in order 
that the world, in like manner, might know the nature 
of the body of the saints " in the resurrection," of 
whom he was " the first fruits," and the model. As 
he then was the saints were to be. 

To the sight of the apostles the body of Jesus 
seemed to be composed of flesh and bones. Had he 
said nothing on the subject, therefore, they would 
doubtless have believed, as many of you do believe, 
that such was the fact, and would have taught the 
world that such was the composition of the bodies of 
all spirits. Perceiving their mistake, however, and 
wishing to correct it, Jesus requested them to handle 
him, " for," said he, " a spirit hath not flesh and 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 71 

bones as ye see me have." He did not say flesh and 
bones as he had, but, as to their sight, he seemed to 
have. He wished them to understand that his flesh 
and bones existed, not in reality, but only in appear- 
ance. Had the evidence of their sight been correct 
in regard to these things they would have needed no 
other evidence. In that case Jesus would have acted 
very absurdly in having them handle him. As well 
might I ask you to handle me to convince yourselves 
that I have flesh and bones, when the evidence of 
your sight has already correctly made known to you 
that fact. Were I a spirit, however, and were I to 
perceive that your sight deceived you in regard to 
the nature of my body, then, to correct that decep- 
tion, I would have you do the very thing which Jesus, 
to correct just such an optical deception, had his 
disciples do — -I would have you handle me. Having 
thus obtained a correct knowledge of the nature of 
the new body of Jesus, the apostles went forth and 
taught the world that, no matter how it may appear 
to the eye, the resurrected body is a spiritual body, 
and not the natural body of flesh and bones which is 
laid aside in death. 

I am well aware that the view which I take of this 
subject is a novel one, and that it comes in direct 
conflict with the whole body of modern priestcraft. 
I am aware that most persons, blinded by this system 
of priestcraft, have been misled into the belief that 
Jesus had his disciples handle him to convince them- 
selves that he had flesh and bones, as they saw that 
he had. But if he really had flesh and bones, and 
the disciples had correctly seen that he had them, 
what need was there for them to handle him in order 



72 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

to ascertain this already established and undisputed 
fact ? "Were you to show me a real apple, would you 
have me handle it in order to convince myself that it 
was a real apple, when my sight had already made 
known to me that fact ? Were you, however, to show 
me a fine imitation of an apple, and were to see that 
I mistook it for a real apple, you would then have 
me handle it to convince myself that my eyes had 
deceived me, and that it had not the composition of 
a real apple, as, to my sight, it seemed to have. In 
this very way Jesus had to undeceive his disciples, 
when they mistook a fine imitation for a real human 
body. 

To carry this illustration still further, you have 
two small boys look at each other through a pane of 
common window-glass. Each one correctly sees the 
other on the opposite side of the glass. In this case 
would you have either of the boys handle his com- 
panion in order to convince himself that his companion 
was really there ? So of the body of Jesus. Had the 
flesh and the bones, which they saw it have, been 
real, there would have been no handling in the case. 
You may show these little boys a looking-glass. 
They see it have little boys on the other side of it. 
In this case, however, you tell them to handle what 
they see, and undeceive themselves, for the glass has 
not little boys on the other side, as they see it have. 
You surely would not have them do this handling to 
convince themselves that the looking-glass actually 
had little boys on the other side, as they saw it have. 
So of Jesus. He surely did not have his disciples 
handle the flesh and the bones which they saw him 



BY THE CHEISTIAN CHUECH. 73 

have, to convince themselves that those objects were 
really what they seemed. 

You show these little boys a rod broken in the 
middle. They see that it is broken, and do not need 
to handle it to ascertain that fact. You now place a 
straight rod obliquely in a body of clear water. The 
little boys see this rod to be broken at the surface of 
the water. In this case, however, you tell them to 
handle the rod and undeceive themselves, for it is not 
broken, as they see it to be. You surely would not 
have them handle it to convince themselves that it 
actually was broken, as they saw it to be. So again 
of the body of Jesus. You call these little boys to 
look upon a beautiful rainbow. They see it have 
ends resting upon the ground, at no great distance. 
You tell them to go and handle the rainbow, for it 
has not ends resting on the ground, as they see it 
have. In this case, as in all the others, the handling is 
done to correct an optical illusion. So, once more, 
of the body of Jesus. The disciples were required 
to handle it to convince themselves that spirits, like 
himself, had not flesh and bones, as to the deceived 
sight he seemed to have. 

Besides all these things it was on this very occa- 
x sion, and just as he then was, that Jesus ascended 
into heaven, " and sat on the right hand of God." 
And are you prepared to maintain that he sits there 
now in a material body of literal flesh and bones ? 
Paul positively declares that " flesh and blood cannot 
inherit the kingdom of heaven." Jesus also, on this 
same occasion, after having his disciples handle him, 
said : " These are the words which I spake unto you 
while I was yet with you." This language shows 



74 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

that he was no longer with them, and that he had 
now made them understand this fact. But in what 
, sense was he no longer with them ? Was he not, at 
that very moment, present in the room with them? 
Could his absence or separation from them have 
meant anything else than that he was no longer 
present with them in the natural body? Had he still 
possessed his old body of flesh and bones he would 
at that moment have been present with them in every 
sense in which he had ever been presant. In that 
case his speaking of being no longer with them would 
have been meaningless and silly. 

" But," you ask, " if Jesus did not rise from the 
dead, and go to heaven in his old body of flesh and 
bones that had suffered on the cross, what became of 
that body ? " This is a fair question, and one easily 
answered. That body, like all other dead bodies not 
artificially preserved, returned to dust. I base this 
answer upon the authority of science, which has 
never been known to lie. " But how came that body 
to be missing from the sepulcher in which it was 
placed when taken down from the cross?" This 
question 1 cannot answer. That body was not given 
into my charge. Those into whose charge it was 
given, however, testified that during the night the 
\ disciples came and stole it away ; and this testimony 
was generally accepted by the Jews, who were best 
prepared to judge correctly concerning the matter. 
" But the guards," you say, " were bribed to make 
this report." Yery likely they were, and it is equally 
likely that they had previously been bribed to let the 
disciples do the very thing set forth in this report. 
The disciples very well knew that it would never do 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 75 

to let that body remain over three days in the 
sepulcher. Within that time they must, by some 
means, obtain the body, and obtain it, too, in such a 
way as to create the impression upon the minds of 
the people that it had returned to life. What is more 
probable, then, than that they would try the effect of 
gold upon the unscrupulous, bribe-taking knaves who 
were on guard at the sepulcher ? That something of 
the kind was done appears still more probable from 
the fact that the body, which, according to Jesus's own 
prediction, should have remained in the sepulcher 
three days, was made to rise after only one day. The 
disciples doubtless knew the right set of guards to 
deal with, and were afraid that this set might not all 
be on duty at the end of the three days. At any rate, 
it would be a very easy matter, at the present time, 
to obtain a body from so base a set of bribe-taking 
knaves as those guards evidently were. " But these 
guards testified that the theft was committed while 
they were asleep." "Very well. Would it have done 
for them to testify that they had permitted this to be 
done while they were awake ? Was not the plea that 
they had unintentionally fallen asleep the only plea 
for their neglect of duty which they could have 
made ? Be all this as it may, however, it seems to 
me much more likely that the body was removed by 
human means than that it returned to life, and 
ascended into heaven. Many other bodies, some 
dead and some alive, have been mysteriously spirited 
away, under far greater difficulties than existed in the 
case of Jesus, and yet no one claims that any of these 
bodies ever ascended into heaven. 

All those persons whose natural bodies have ever 



76 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

been resuscitated or raised from the dead have be- 
come, after their resuscitation, just as they were 
before their temporary decease, and all of them have 
passed a second time through the change called 
death. None of them have ever gone from earth in 
their material bodies. Indeed, Paul declares that 
even those saints who may be on earth when the last 
trump shall sound shall not enter heaven in their 
fleshly bodies ; but, in the twinkling of an eye, shall 
be changed, their natural and corruptible bodies for 
spiritual and incorruptible bodies, in which alone 
{hey can enter heaven. If, then, the natural and cor- 
ruptible body of Jesus, after having perished upon 
the cross, was ever resuscitated, and was never again 
subjected to the change called death, then, of 
necessity, that body must have passed, in the twink- 
ling of an eye, through the wonderful change of which 
Paul speaks, and thus become a spiritual and incor- 
ruptible body. '• Flesh and blood cannot enter the 
kingdom of heaven." 

From all these things we learn that, at the time of 
which we are speaking, Jesus was clothed, not in a 
corruptible body of flesh and bones, as to the deceived 
sight he seemed to be, but in a spiritual and incor- 
ruptible body, like unto the bodies of " the angels 
which are in heaven," and of " the spirits of just men 
made perfect." In other words, I have now proved 
beyond all possibility of contradiction that, after his 
resurrection, Jesus was a pure spirit. Like other 
spirits, he became visible and invisible at pleasure ; 
he entered into, and passed out of, rooms with closed 
doors ; and, finally, in direct opposition to the law of 
gravitation, he ascended from earth into heaven. If 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 77 

at that time he was not a spirit, what was he? You 
are forced to admit that he was then, as he is now, a 
spirit ; and since, as the apostles afterward declared, 
God has never been seen, you are forced to admit 
also that the part of Jesus which was visible to men 
was his human part. In other words, you are forced 
to admit that, as seen by men after his resurrection, 
Jesus was a human spirit. 

In my last lecture I proved that, while yet in the 
body, Jesus called up spirits, and conversed with 
them. By thus practicing Spiritualism himself, in 
the presence of those who were to be the founders of 
his church, he not only demonstrated its truth, but, 
also, by thus fixing upon it his seal of approval, for- 
ever settled the question as to its propriety. He 
was then acting from our own side of the great river 
of death, and being our ensample in this, as in all 
other things, he thus taught us to commune, at 
pleasure, with the beautiful beings on the other 
shore. Then, when he had passed over this great 
and mysterious river, and had himself thus become a 
spirit, he again taught Spiritualism from the other 
side by frequent communications with the loved ones 
he had left behind. Thus by his own example, acting 
in turn from both sides of the river of death, he 
taught Spiritualism to the inhabitants of our own 
world, and of the world of spirits. " The saints 
which slept," acting upon his example, began at once 
to make their appearance among men. 

"To them that believe on his name " Jesus gave 
power to do all the works which he did, and even 
" greater works than these." This gift includes the 
power to communicate with spirits while we remain 



78 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

men, and to communicate with men when we become 
spirits. These were among the works that Jesus 
did, and, in the doing of these and other similar 
works, he promised to be with " them that believe," 
" alway, even unto the end of the world." 

How dare you, then, pretend to be a believer in 
the teachings of Jesus, and yet denounce all these his 
promised works as humbugs, and of the devil ? Had 
you lived in the time of Jesus, how supremely ridic- 
ulous you would have made himself and his teachings 
appear! And, were he now to appear among us, 
humble as he then was, and were to go about as he 
then did, teaching Spiritualism, how promptly, and 
with what ineffable scorn, you would brand him as a 
miserable "humbug." His followers were then, as 
they are now, almost entirely composed of irreligious 
persons. Many of them were outcasts from society. 
The professors of religion almost unanimously 
rejected him as a deceiver, a glutton, a wine-bibber, 
etc. This they did, partly because he went about in 
soiled garments, ate with unwashed hands, and asso- 
ciated with a class of people who were not admitted 
into good society. They did it principally, however, 
because, with arguments which they could not 
answer, he boldly attacked their favorite dogmas. 
These were not really wicked men. They were 
members of the orthodox church, the custodians and 
expounders of the scriptures, the owners of the 
wealth of the nation, the guardians of morality, the 
devout worshipers of the only true God. In short, 
they were just what the best class of orthodox relig- 
ionists are to-day — well-meaning bigots. . They 
opposed Jesus, not from wicked motives, but because 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 79 

they believed that his teachings and his example 
were calculated to overturn the institutions of society, 
promote vagrancy and immorality, and diminish the 
respect due to religion. They did just as you would 
have done had you been in their places ; just as you 
would now do were Jesus to come among us, and act 
just as he did then. In short, these high-toned and 
devout champions of the Bible, of morality, and of 
orthodoxy, treated Jesus just as you, to the fullest 
extent of your power, do now treat me, and all others 
who, like Jesus, dare boldly attack error whenever 
found, and who, with arguments which you cannot 
answer, are establishing grand and beautiful truths, 
and who are threatening the overthrow of many of 
your man-made, your priest-paying, your soul-dwarf- 
ing, your time-rotten religious dogmas. 

In Kev. iii, 20, we read : " Behold, I stand at the 
door and knock : if any man hear my voice, and open 
the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with 
him, and he with me." This was spoken by Jesus 
long after he had become a spirit. If, then, he 
speaks the truth, and actually does stand and knock 
or rap upon our doors, are not his rappings genuine 
spirit rappings ? 

Because from your childhood up you have been so 
taught, by unscrupulous priests who bend all script- 
ures to suit their own creeds, you will, as a matter 
of course, contend that on this occasion Jesus did not 
mean what he said, nor say what he meant ; that 
when he said the door he meant the heart, etc. In 
reply to all this I will say that Jesus probably under- 
stood the meaning he intended to express fully as 
well as you understand it, and that he probably used 



80 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

the proper words to express that meaning. Had he 
on this occasion meant the heart, he would doubtless, 
as on other occasions, have used the word heart to 
express that meaning. Besides this, a heart is not 
so convenient a thing to " stand at," and to " knock " 
upon, as is a door, nor do men enter in through 
hearts to " sup." If you change the word door, in 
the text, to heart, you are bound also to make a cor- 
responding change in all the other words of the 
sentence. Then, of course, you will have a text sup- 
porting your own creed, but made entirely by 
yourself and with your own meaning ; not a text 
made by Jesus, with his meaning. 

The changing of texts in this manner, or, rather, 
the doing away with them entirely, and the making 
of new texts in their places, has been found extremely 
convenient in the propping up of their respective 
creeds by all the different denominations of Chris- 
tians. They have all made a liberal use of this 
privilege, and by so doing have filled the world with 
interminable wranglings, and have on many occasions 
filled all the nations of Christendom with the most 
horrible scenes of carnage. 

They can all easily agree to do away with Bible 
texts, and Bible meanings ; but over the creed-texts, 
and creed-meanings, which are substituted for these, 
they always quarrel ; and frequently, for the love of 
the merciful Jesus, they mercilessly cut one anothers' 
throats by the tens of thousands at once. Every 
historian knows that these are simple historical facts. 
And yet you persist in a course which you very well 
know has been the cause of countless and unspeak- 
able evils. Is it not just as unfair to charge Jesus 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 81 

with meaning heart, when he says door, as it would 
be to charge him with meaning door, when he says 
heart ? Taking the text, however, as made by your- 
self, are not the knockings or influences of the 
spirit Jesus upon the heart just as genuine and just 
as wonderful spiritual manifestations as would be 
any literal rappings upon a real door? With any 
meaning, therefore, that can possibly be given to its 
language, I have, in this text, established a genuine 
case of spiritual communication — a case, too, which 
you dare not, according to your custom, stigmatize 
as of the devil. 

In Rev. vii, 9, we read : " After this I beheld, and 
lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, 
of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, 
stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, 
clothed in white robes, and palms in their hands." 
If John tells the truth, as he probably does, he 
actually did see all those innumerable hosts of 
spirits. As he tells us in another place, he also 
actually heard their voices. If he really did see all 
these spirits, and hear their voices, was he not a 
wonderful spiritual medium ? Was this case of the 
devil ? What would you think of John, if he were 
living now, a near neighbor to you, and were to report 
that he had seen and heard so many spirits ? Would 
you not put him down as an impostor or an insane 
person ? And was he any less an impostor, any less 
an insane man, when he did report these things than 
he would be were he to report them now ? Letting 
all these things pass, however, how far from the 
earth could those spirits have been, and yet have 
been so distinctly seen and heard by him ? And, by 



82 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

the same power that then enabled John to see and to 
hear spirits, may not men now be enabled, in like 
manner, to see and to hear them ? Have either men 
or spirits, since John's time, been deprived of any of 
their powers or capacities ? 

Forced to admit that Spiritualism did prevail 
among the Jews and the founders of the Christian 
Church, you now resort, in your desperation, to the 
totally unfounded assumption that all spiritual man- 
ifestations ceased soon after the time of the apostles. 
You would doubtless be glad to deny that Spirit- 
ualism ever did prevail at all among the Jews, the 
apostles, or any others. To deny this, however, 
would be, as you well know, to deny the truth of the 
whole Bible, and to leave no foundation at all for 
your own religion. The best you can do, therefore, 
is to assume that, although spiritual manifestations 
did once prevail, God discovered that they did not 
pay, and that consequently he caused them all to 
cease. In resorting to this assumption, however, 
you make liars of Jesus and the apostles, who de- 
clared that these signs should " follow them that 
believe," " alway, even unto the end of the world." 
You also make liars of all the fathers of the church, 
of all the saints, of all the martyrs, and of all the 
historians down, at least, to the time of the so-called 
Reformation. You also make liars of Luther, of 
Melancthon, of Zwinglius, of Calvin, of Wesley, of 
Clarke — of nearly all, in fact, of the great lights and 
the great leaders of your own churches. You make 
liars, too, of countless thousands of the most truthful 
and intelligent persons, of all nations, and of all 
religions, of the present age. All of these grand wit- 



BY THE CHBISTIAN CHUECH. 83 

nesses testify that spiritual manifestations have never 
been absent from among men. And should your 
totally unsupported assumption that all these mani- 
festations have ceased weigh more with us than this 
mighty accumulation of the testimony of all nations, 
of all religions, and of all ages ? 

Because you happen never to have seen or to have 
communed with a spirit yourself, you contend that 
the seeing of spirits, and the communing with them, 
ceased about eighteen hundred years ago. So, 
because I happen never to have seen a lion, or to 
have heard one roar, I contend, with equal reason, 
that the seeing of lions, and the hearing of them 
roar, ceased about eighteen hundred years ago. Our 
cases are exactly parallel, our conclusions equally 
reasonable. Negative testimony proves nothing at 
all. The positive testimony of one good witness to 
the effect that he has seen a lion, or a spirit, is worth 
more than the negative testimony of a million equally 
good witnesses to the effect that they have not seen 
any such thing. 

Time will not permit me to give even a thousandth 
part of the testimony in favor of Spiritualism which 
is to be found within the domain of the Christian 
Church. I will add enough, however, to that already 
given, to fully satisfy all those whom priestcraft has 
not rendered incapable of reasoning on such matters 
that Spiritualism is, indeed, a glorious reality. 

Justin Martyr, who died in 161, says that the in- 
carnation took place " for the sake of unbelievers, and 
for the overthrow of evil spirits." He then adds : 
" You may know this now from what passes before 
your eyes ; for many demoniacs all over the world, 



84 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

and in your own metropolis, whom none other 
exorcists, conjurers, or sorcerers have cured, these 
have many of our Christians cured, adjuring by the 
name of Christ, and still do cure." Again he says : 
" "With us, even hitherto, are prophetic gifts, from 
which you Jews ought to gather, that what formerly 
belonged to your race is transferred to us." Else- 
where he says : " With us may be seen both males 
and females, with gifts from the spirit of God." 

Irenseus, who suffered martyrdom in 202, says: 
" Some most certainly and truly cast out demons, so 
that frequently those persons themselves that were 
cleansed from wicked spirits believed and were 
received into the church. Others have the knowl- 
edge of things to come, as also visions and prophetic 
communications. Others heal the sick by the interpo- 
sition of hands, and restore them to health." In another 
place he says : " We hear of many of the brethren in 
the church who have prophetic gifts, and who speak 
in all tongues through the spirit, and who also bring 
to light the secret things of men for their benefit, 
and who expound the mysteries of God." These 
extracts are given as quoted by Eusebius, and show 
that spiritual phenomena were still prevalent in the 
Church at the close of the second century. 

Tertullian, the most eloquent father of the second 
century, in his work "De Amma," says: "We had 
a right, after what was said by St. John, to expect 
prophesyings ; and we not only acknowledge these 
spiritual gifts, but we are permitted to enjoy the gifts of 
a prophetess. There is a sister among us who possesses 
the faculty of revelation.' She commonly, during our 
religious service, on the Sabbath, falls into a crisis 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHUECH. 85 

or trance. She has then intercourse with the angels, 
sees sometimes the Lord himself, sees and hears 
divine mysteries, and discovers the hearts of some 
persons ; and administers medicine to such as desire 
it." After adding much more, all to the same effect, 
he says that on one occasion, after the close of the 
service, " she informed us that she had seen a soul in 
bodily shape ; that it appeared to be a spirit, but not 
empty or formless, or wanting a living constitution, 
but that its form appeared so substantial that you 
might touch or hold it. It was tender, shining, of 
the color of air, but in everything resembling the 
human form." Here, then, near the close of the sec- 
ond century, we have a genuine Spiritualist — a well- 
developed, seeing, hearing, and healing medium, 
holding her seances in the church during the religious 
services ; and yet we see her receiving the highest 
marks of confidence and respect from this great 
father, and from all the members of the church, who 
looked upon her mediumistic powers, thus exercised 
among them, as special favors from heaven. How 
promptly you would put a stop to such proceedings 
should they be attempted in those gorgeous resorts 
of pride and of fashion which you absurdly call your 
churches ! In another place Tertullian says : "Exor- 
cists appeal to the power of angels and demons, who 
prophesy through goats and tables." We all know 
what is meant by prophesying through tables. In 
regard to the goats, however, the meaning is not so 
clear. 

St. Cyprian, who suffered martyrdom in 258, con- 
firms all this testimony, and adds much more of a 
similar character. He relates that on one occasion, 



86 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

while quite awake, lie liad a vision of a young man 
of more than mortal stature, who showed him him- 
self, led before the proconsul, and condemned to die 
as a martyr to Christianity. He recorded his vision, 
and it was afterward fulfilled to the letter. 

St. Augustine, St. Jerome, and many others testify 
to the continuance of spiritual manifestations in the 
church during the fourth and the fifth centuries. 
Among many other things of a similar nature, St. 
Augustine, in his work, "T>e Cura pro Mortuis," 
declares that the spirit of the martyr Felix ap- 
peared at Nota. St. Jerome taught that the spirits 
of the saints are everywhere doing the work of the 
Savior. In his reply to an opposer of Spiritualism, 
he asks : " What dost thou mean? Wilt thou pre- 
scribe laws to God? Are the apostles to remain 
bound in chains till the day of judgment ? Is it not 
written of them that they shall follow the Lamb 
everywhere ? Is the Lamb then everywhere ? Then 
they are everywhere, too, and where they will." 
What do you think of this brave and eloquent old 
Spiritualist ? 

Sozomen relates that an evil spirit, in the form of 
a beautiful woman, appeared to a noted theurgist, 
by the name of Apelles, who struck it in the face 
with a hot iron. This was certainly a very remark- 
able spiritual manifestation. Apelles, however, was 
guilty of a very ungallant act in striking the spirit in 
its face. I would not treat anything that way that 
would come to me in the form of a beautiful woman. 

In his fortieth sermon St. Ambrose declares that 
the martyr Agnes was seen one night at her grave, 
surrounded by a choir of singing maidens. Was not 



BY THE CHKISTIAN CHUKCH. 87 

that a spiritual manifestation? Eusebius relates that 
a certain officer, Basilides, was converted to Chris- 
tianity by the spirit of the martyr Potamisena. 
Basilides had shown her kindness at the time of her 
execution, and she promised that after her death she 
would appear to him. She did thus appear in con- 
sequence, and he became a Christian. Was not this 
a case of Spiritualism ? And was it of the devil ? 

St. Gregory gives many instances of the appearing 
of spirits, both good and bad. Origen contends that 
the spirits of bad men are bound to the earth by 
their base and earthly desires, and that they often 
appear to men and disturb them. Irenaeus bears 
witness to the same things, as do also St. Augustine, 
Chrysostom, Theocloret, and hosts of others, the 
great lights, the heroes of Christianity. Indeed, as 
the great moral philosopher, John Locke, says, you 
must destroy the authority, and the common honesty, 
of all the fathers, or admit the continuance of spirit- 
ual manifestations. 

And dare you undertake to prove that all the 
fathers, all the saints, all the martyrs, and all the 
historians of the first six centuries were liars, totally 
devoid of common honesty? If not, then you are 
bound to admit that Spiritualism, in all its phases, 
did prevail in the Christian Church during all those 
centuries. And did all spiritual phenomena cease 
after the close of the sixth century ? The unanimous 
voice of the whole church and of the whole world for 
the next thousand years, emphatically answers, 
" No ! ! " For want of time I cannot, at present, notice 
any portion of this vast accumulation of testimony. 

It now devolves upon you to show when all spirit- 



88 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

ual phenomena ceased, why they all ceased, by whose 
authority they all ceased, by what means they were 
made to cease, and why they may not have been 
recommenced in our own time. Can you show any 
of these things ? If not, what becomes of your base- 
less assumption that all of these phenomena have 
ceased ? Where are the spirits now, and how are 
they confined to keep them from communing with 
men, as they did in earlier times ? You say that the 
good spirits are in heaven, the wicked spirits in hell. 
But what and where are heaven and hell, and what 
modern improvements have been made in them to 
keep their inhabitants from communing, as they 
formerly did, with the inhabitants of earth ? And is 
Jesus also confined in heaven? Is he never present, 
on earth, at your revivals, your camp-meetings, etc. ? 
If he is present at these places, is he never accom- 
panied by spirits ? If not, then we have succeeded 
in proving John a monstrous liar, for in Rev. xiv, 4, 
he describes a host of spirits, and says : " These are 
they which follow the Lamb withersoever he goeth. 
They were redeemed from among men," etc. If 
Jesus is not present at your revivals, etc., are not 
your churches, from beginning to end, enormous 
swindling concerns? If you admit that Jesus is 
sometimes present at your meetings, you are bound 
to admit also that on those occasions, as well as on 
all others, he is accompanied by those spirits " which 
follow " him " whithersoever he goeth." In making 
these admissions, however, you admit not only the 
truth, but also the glorious nature of Spiritualism. 
If you deny all these things, then you are bound to 
admit that yourselves are a set of shameless im- 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 89 

postors, and unmitigated scoundrels. Which one of 
these unpleasant admissions will you make ? 

Calmet, who wrote less than two hundred years 
ago, says : " We have in history several instances of 
persons, full of religion and piety, who, in the fervor 
of their orisons, have been taken up into the air, and 
remained there for some time. We have known a 
good monk who rises sometimes from the ground, 
and remains suspended without wishing it, without 
seeking to do so, especially on seeing some devotional 
image, or on hearing some devout prayer, such as 
* Gloria in Excelsis Deo.' I know a nun to whom it 
has happened, in spite of herself, to see herself thus 
raised up in the air to a certain distance from the 
earth." He also says that this same thing occurred 
to St. Philip of Neri, to St. Catharine Columbina, 
and to Loyola, who " was raised up from the ground 
to the height of two feet, while his body shone like 
light." St. Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, was 
thus elevated in the presence of many witnesses. In 
1036 Richard, Abbot of St. Vanne de Verdun, was 
thus elevated in the presence of the Duke Galizan 
and his sons, and a great number of lords and ladies. 
Among many others who were thus elevated were St. 
Robert de Palentin, St. Philip Benitas, St. Cajatanus, 
St. Albert of Sicily, St. Francis of Assissium, St. 
Dominic, founder of the order of preaching brothers, 
and Savonarola, who was afterward put to death for 
becoming a Protestant. Sfc. Theresa relates of her- 
self that she was thus raised up from the ground. 
And now, let me ask, if all these persons, or if any 
of them, were thus raised up by spirit power, why 



90 SPIKITUALISM SUSTAINED 

may not persons of our own time be raised up in the 
same manner by the same power ? 

Catholics will not deny any of the spiritual mani- 
festations which I have mentioned, nor any of the 
thousands of other well authenticated cases which I 
could give from Catholic writers, famous alike for 
their learning, their intelligence, and the purity of 
their lives. As an evidence that they are the true 
church of Christ, Catholics always have claimed to 
possess all those spiritual gifts promised by Jesus to 
" them that believe." It is this Spritualism, too, 
among Catholics which, notwithstanding their many 
imperfections, gives them life, and union, and 
strength. On the other hand, it is the want of this 
Spiritualism among Protestants which, notwithstand- 
ing their many perfections, causes them to be all 
broken up into a thousand hostile sects or factions, 
which, by their constant wranglings, and their count- 
less contradictions, are doing more to make infidels 
than are all other influences combined. 

You claim, however, that all the cases of spiritual 
manifestation which I have given, from the writers 
of the church, are lies invented by Catholics. This 
may be true ; but in that case, what becomes of your 
New Testament ? It was gotten up and put before 
the world by these same lying Catholics. This was 
done, too, at a time when, according to your own 
account, they were specially active in manufacturing 
the lies in question. As most of you doubtless 
know, the New Testament was compiled from a vast 
multitude of conflicting gospels, epistles, etc., by the 
first council of Nice, in the early part of the fourth 
century. Athanasius was the leader of the orthodox 



BY THE CHEISTIAN CHUKCH. 91 

division of that council, and was the framer of your 
orthodox or Athanasian creed ; and yet, few men, if 
any, ever manufactured and left on record a greater 
number of the so-called lies in question than did he. 
Indeed, we find a greater or less number of those so- 
called lies in the works of every member of that 
council whose writings have reached our own time. 
The orthodox division of that council, whom you 
follow, all agreed in palming off the lies in question 
upon the world, and in honoring, as most noted for 
piety, the men who manufactured the greatest num- 
ber of these lies. And do you suppose that a council, 
composed of men so far gone in the vice of lying, 
would fail to supply the New Testament with a 
goodly number* of these lies ? Would they not be 
sure to so get this book up that it would correspond 
with their other books which were all filled with 
lies ? What assurance, then, . have you that your 
New Testament is not filled with Catholic lies ? 
Better investigate this matter. 

According to your own arguments, the spiritual 
manifestations recorded by Calmet and other recent 
writers, whose works have not been tampered with, 
are really better authenticated than are any of those 
recorded in the New Testament, and the objections 
which you urge against the writings of these, and of 
other eminent Catholic authors, bear with increased 
weight against the writings of the New Testament. 
Destroy the authenticity of the one set of these 
writings, then, yourselves, and infidels, adopting your 
own arguments, will quickly destroy the authenticity 
of the other set. 

But do Catholics never tell the truth ? Have they 



92 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

not always been, and are they not now, devoted 
Christians? And does Christianity tend to make 
unmitigated liars of all its devotees ? How does it 
happen that you Protestants are all so wonderfully 
truthful, when you are devoted to the same religion, 
and when you so recently formed a part of a people 
so wofully addicted to lying ? Is not human nature 
the same in you that it is in them ? What have you 
that you did not receive from them ? Are you not a 
branch from the great Catholic tree? And can a 
branch differ in its nature from the tree which pro- 
duces it ? Take away all that you have received from 
Catholics, and what will you have left ? Absolutely 
nothing, except a few negative doctrines — denials of 
miracles, etc., for which you are indebted to the 
great infidel writers of France and of Germany. 
And is it to infidelity that you owe "your superior 
truthfulness ? If not, to what do you owe it ? For 
my life I cannot see any good reason why you should 
be so much better every way than are your Catholic 
Christian brethren. Whatever the reason may be, 
however, the fact stares us in fche face that you never 
lie, and that your great leaders are necessarily first- 
class witnesses in any case in which they are called 
upon to testify. Let us see, then, what they have to 
say on the subject of Spiritualism. 

Dr. Conyers Middleton, your great anti-miracle 
champion, says : " It must be confessed that the 
claim to a miraculous power was universally asserted 
and believed in all Christian countries, and in all 
ages of the church, till the time of the Keformation, 
for ecclesiastical history makes no difference between 
one age and another, but carries on the succession of 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 93 

its miracles, as of other common events, through all 
of them indifferently to that memorable period. As 
far as church historians can illustrate anything, 
there is not a single point in all history so constantly, 
explicitly, and unanimously affirmed by them as the 
continual succession of those powers, through all 
ages, from the earliest father who first mentions 
them, down to the Reformation ; which same succes- 
sion is still further deduced by persons of the same 
eminent character for probity, learning, and dignity 
in the Eomish church to this very day." 

This is the language of one of the brightest lights 
of Protestantism — of a man of vast powers of mind 
and of immense learning ; of a man, too, so intensely 
bitter in his opposition to the Catholic church, and 
to the doctrine of spiritual manifestations, that, 
while he admits the " eminent character for probity, 
learning, and dignity " of the fathers of the church 
and of other Catholic writers, he resolves to bring, 
and does bring, the charge of wholesale and unmiti- 
gated lying against them all, from the first father 
down to the latest writer of his own time. This he 
does, not because he believes the charge to be true, 
but because he believes that, in the war which 
Protestantism is carrying on against the Catholic 
church, such a charge is necessary. He fears, and 
with good reason, too, that by admitting that Cath- 
olics do still possess those spiritual gifts which, as 
signs, were to " follow them that believe," we should 
be forced to admit also, as we certainly would, that 
they constitute the true church of Christ. He says : 
" For if any credit be due them in the present case, 
it must reach to all or none ; because the reason for 



94 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

believing them in any one age will be found to be of 
equal force in all, as far as it depends on the char- 
acter of the persons attesting, or the thing attested. 
. . . By granting to the Romanists but a single 
age of miracles, after the time of the apostles, we 
shall be entangled in a series of difficulties whence 
we can never fairly extricate ourselves till we allow 
the same powers also to the present age." He 
blames those Protestant writers severely who admit 
that genuine miracles did continue to prevail during 
the first four or five centuries. He blames these 
writers, not because the admitted miracles were not 
genuine, but because, by admitting them to have 
been genuine, they have made a concession to the 
Catholic church, which, if allowed, would be fatal to 
Protestantism. 

We now understand why it is that you, and nearly 
all other Protestants, so persistently deny the gen- 
uineness of all spiritual manifestations. You have 
no objection to the signs themselves, but you justly 
fear the thing signified by them. Admit that Spirit- 
ualists or any other people do possess genuine 
spiritual gifts, and you admit that they are of " them 
that believe," and of "them who shall be heirs of 
salvation." You know this, and being destitute of 
these signs yourselves, you feel that you appear^in 
the rather unenviable light of mere pretenders. 
Hence your very natural desire to make others seem 
to be in the same condition. You are like the fox in 
the fable, who, having lost his own tail, in order to 
make the misfortune general, tried to deprive all the 
other foxes of their tails. 

Unfortunately for you, however, your founder, the 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 95 

great Luther himself, in the most positive manner, 
testifies to the truth of Spiritualism. His testimony 
is, of necessity, either true or false. If true, then by 
that testimony I prove that Spiritualism is true, and 
that it was present at the ushering in of Protestant- 
ism, just as it had been present at the ushering in of < 
Christianity itself. If, however, his testimony be 
false, then Luther stands before us a convicted liar 
and impostor, and you stand before us the convicted 
followers of a liar and impostor. "Which horn of 
this dilemma will you choose? If Luther lies in 
favor of Spiritualism, which he does not wish to 
establish, is he not sure to lie in favor of those 
things which he does wish to establish? If, then, 
we shall reject his testimony in favor of Spiritualism, 
is there not a double reason why we should reject 
his testimony in favor of Protestantism ? 

You have only to read his biography, or his own 
writings, to learn that he was accustomed, almost 
daily, to see spirits, and to hold conversations with 
them. It is true he regarded most of these as evil 
spirits, and treated them accordingly. He was so 
sorely afflicted with the devil-on-the-brain that what- 
ever he could not clearly understand he at once, very 
naturally, attributed to the devil. This, however, 
does not in the least invalidate his testimony in 
regard to the genuineness of the manifestations 
themselves. Neither the character of the spirits 
themselves, nor that of the communications made by 
them, has anything to do in the case. The only 
question is, did Luther see spirits and converse with 
them at all ? If he did, then no matter what may 
have been the character of those spirits, my case is 



96 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

gained, and Spiritualism is established. "When I 
prove that spirits are in the habit of communicating 
with men, do I not prove that such communication is 
practicable ? And if evil spirits have power to com- 
municate in this manner, have not good spirits power 
to do the same ? Dare you assert the absurd and 
blasphemous doctrine that God grants powers the 
most desirable, and privileges the most dear, to 
wicked spirits, who abuse them for the eternal ruin 
of men, while at the same time he denies these 
powers and these privileges to good spirits, who 
would use them for the eternal salvation of men ? 
Does God thus reward the wicked, and punish the 
good ? Could the devil do worse than this ? 

Luther, however, does not claim that all the spirits 
are evil, or that any of them are necessarily so, that 
communicate with men. On the contrary, he says : 
" I will not derogate from the gifts of others, if haply 
to any one, over and above scripture, God should 
reveal aught by dreams, by visions, or by angels." 
Sometimes the spirits that came to him were in 
angelic forms, and some of them gave him good 
advice, which he followed. A short time before the 
death of their daughter Magdalen, Mrs. Luther, in a 
vision, saw two beautiful youths, who came to ask 
her daughter in marriage. On relating her vision to 
Melancthon, he declared that the youths were angels 
come to convey the pure spirit of the girl to the true 
marriage of the heavenly kingdom. On that same 
day Magdalen died. Suspicious as he was in regard 
to the character of spirits, Luther never doubted that 
these two were good spirits. Indeed, when disputing 
with the Anabaptists, he required them to prove 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 97 

their authority by performing miracles. From this 
we learn that he regarded all those as impostors to 
whom were wanting those spiritual gifts promised to 
" them that believe." Speaking of the Swinkfeldians, 
he says : " If I must glory in what belongs to me, I 
have seen more spirits than they will see in a whole 
year." 

Melancthon was also a Spiritualist, and a good 
medium. Indeed, without being both of these, no 
one can be successful as a religious leader. He often 
conversed with spirits. I will give only one instance. 
On this occasion the spirit appeared in the clear 
light of day, when several persons were present. A 
certain preacher, GrynaBus, having by his criticisms 
offended another preacher, returned to his lodgings, 
and related the affair to Melancthon and others who 
sat at table with him. Soon Melancthon was called 
out to speak with a strange old man, well-dressed 
and of honest countenance, and who urged Melanc- 
thon to hurry Grynseus out of the city, and thus have 
him escape arrest at the hands of an officer who, in- 
stigated by the offended preacher, would come 
within an hour to conduct Grynaeus to prison. Hav- 
ing delivered his message, the old man, or the spirit, 
as it proved to be, vanished out of sight. 

In the Homilies of the Church of England we 
read : " The Holy Ghost doth always declare him- 
self, by the word of wisdom, by the word of knowl- 
edge, which is the understanding of the scriptures ; 
by faith in doing of miracles, by healing them that 
are diseased, by prophecy, by discerning of spirits, 
by the diversities of tongues," etc. Can all this be 
true, and yet Spiritualism be false ? 



98 SPIEITUALISM SUSTAINED 

The spiritual manifestations in the Wesley family, 
and the defense by the Wesleys of the doctrine of 
spiritual communications, are too well-known, and 
too well-authenticated, to require any notice from 
me. And were the Wesleys truthful men ? If they 
were, then by their own testimony I prove the truth 
of Spiritualism. If they were not, then I prove many 
of you to be the followers of liars and impostors. 
Had I time, I could also prove the truth of Spiritual- 
ism by the testimony of John Calvin, John Knox, 
Alexander Campbell, and, in fact, by that of nearly 
all the others of your greatest and best leaders. 

Dr. Adam Clarke says : " That the spirits of the 
dead might and did appear was a doctrine held by 
the greatest and holiest men that ever existed ; and 
a doctrine which the cavillers, free-thinkers and 
bound-thinkers of different ages haye never been 
able to disprove." With " the greatest and holiest 
men that ever existed " on our side, and with the full 
assurance that we have truth, also, on our side, need 
we fear your puny opposition ? 

You have a great deal to say about heaven ; about 
the splendid mansions, the fine clothes, the musical 
instruments, etc., which you profess to own there. 
You talk loudly about going there yourselves, and 
try to get others hooked on to go along with you. 
And yet, as I have already shown, you have not the 
faintest idea as to where heaven is, or as to what it 
is, unless, as Spiritualists teach, it be here round 
about us, and consists alone in condition. Do you 
think that one of your most intelligent and most 
highly educated preachers could look you steadily in 
the face, and, without laughing, declare on the honor 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 99 

of a gentleman that he does truly believe all that 
which for money he preaches to you about this 
vague, this totally unlocatable heaven ? 

Since, according to your own teachings, all com- 
munication has been cut off between the spirit world 
and our own, how do new-born spirits from earth 
manage to get to your heaven ? Can they pass over 
a way impassable to older and more experienced 
spirits ? You say that they are borne thither by 
angels. But have I not already proved that many of 
the angels, if not all of them, are human beings, and 
that, at any rate, human spirits, acting as angels, 
have the same powers as have other angels ? If, 
then, angels can come to earth, cannot human spirits 
do the same ? And who would be more likely to 
come than would the relatives and the friends of the 
new-born spirit? Would not such spirits, too, while 
here, be very likely to make communications to men ? 
And, whether the angels be human spirits or not, 
how do they know exactly when and where on earth 
their services are required ? Does not such knowl- 
edge, on their part, prove the existence of a constant 
correspondence between the two worlds, or the two 
conditions ? When men first die, where are their 
spirits ? Here, of course, and here they are bound 
to remain till the next angel express train starts in 
the direction in which they propose to go. Spirits, 
then, can and do exist here for a time ; and if for a 
time, why not always? Suppose that the roads 
should in some way get out of repair, and the angel 
express train be stopped. What then ? Would all 
the new-born spirits perish — suffer annihilation — or 
would they not remain round about us, as did the 



100 SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED 

spirits in former ages, before you had heaven moved 
away ? In any conceivable case, except that of anni- 
hilation, are we not bound at times to have spirits 
about us ? 

Finally, how does your heaven — wherever it may 
be — retain its position in space ? If by the law of 
gravitation, then it must be composed of matter, like 
the earth and other planetary bodies, and must also, 
like them, possess planetary motion. This would make 
it a planet, governed like the earth, by physical laws. 
Such, indeed, it is bound to be, if it possesses matter 
at all. If, however, it be entirely destitute of matter, 
then, of necessity, it must be a perfect vacuum, 
equivalent to nothing at all. Where, then, and what 
is your heaven, and in what are its inhabitants occu- 
pied, since you had them stopped from ministering 
to men? You cannot tell where your heaven is, nor 
what it is, but you can tell how its inhabitants are 
employed ! " They are resting," you say, " loafing 
around the throne, singing hallelujahs, playing on 
golden harps, tooting on penny trumpets loaned them 
for that purpose," etc. Yery well. But what have 
they done to make them either need or desire so 
much rest? And when, where, and how did the 
great majority of them acquire their wonderful taste 
for music, and so entirely lose their taste for every- 
thing else ? To you such a place might be heaven, 
indeed ; but to me so much noise and so much monot- 
ony would soon become intolerable. I would as lief 
try hell at once. 

"Without going outside of the Bible, and of the 
orthodox Christian church, I have now fully proved 
the truth of all the claims of Spiritualism. I have 



BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. 101 

proved it by Luther, by Melancthon, by the "Wesleys, 
by Middleton, and by Clarke. I have proved it by 
the unanimous testimony of all the fathers, of all the 
saints, of all the martyrs, of all the historians of the 
church, of all the evangelists, of all the apostles, and 
of Jesus himself. And now, in refutation of all this 
mighty accumulation of testimony, what have you to 
offer ? You may cry, " Humbug ! infidelity ! blas- 
phemy ! down with him ! great is Diana of the 
Ephesians ! Hurrah for our church and our creeds ! " 
You may persecute me, as others have done, and 
render my lot a hard one, and yet, will you thereby 
have answered any of my arguments, or rendered 
Spiritualism any the less true, any the less glorious ? 



LECTUEE III 

SPIKITUALISM A NECESSITY IN GOD'S GENEEAL GOVERNMENT. 

Not believing in the existence of any such being as 
" God," I cannot, of course, believe in the existence 
of any such thing as " God's General Government." 
Having determined, however, to concede to my 
opponents everything claimed by them, I shall pro- 
ceed in this lecture, as I proceeded in the two pre- 
ceding lectures, on the hypothesis that there is a 
God, that he has a General Government, and that 
the teachings of the Bible and of the Christian 
church are all true. Then, using these teachings in 
favor of Spiritualism, I propose to compel my oppo- 
nents, as I compelled them in the preceding two 
lectures, to either accept Spiritualism as fully estab- 
lished, or to impeach the testimony of their own 
witnesses. 

In my two preceding lectures I fully established 
the truth of all the doctrines of Spiritualism. This 
I did exclusively on the testimony of the Bible and 
of the Christian church. In my present lecture I 
shall prove by the same witnesses that Spiritualism, 
in its various phases is an absolute necessity in the 
carrying on of God's General Government. In 
proving this I shall prove that Spiritualism is not 



A NECESSITY IN GOD'S GENERAL GOVERNMENT. 103 

only true, but is also of God, and not of the devil, as 
some of you have dared to blasphemously assert. 

In Luke xv, 10, we read : " Likewise, I say unto 
you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God 
over one sinner that repenteth." And now who are 
those persons that thus rejoice " in the presence of 
the angels of God?" The language evidently does 
not apply to the angels themselves, since the rejoicing 
is not represented as being done by them, but as 
being done by somebody else in their presence. The 
happy beings in question, then, can be no other than 
" the spirits of just men made perfect." These, and 
these only, dwell "in the presence of the angels of 
God." Indeed, it is highly probably, if not abso- 
lutely certain, that on any one occasion the rejoicing 
is principally done by the friends and the relatives 
of the particular " sinner that repenteth." This is 
the view that Christian Spiritualists take of this 
subject, and is the only view that involves no absurd- 
ities. 

On account of their love for him, the friends and 
the relatives of the penitent would naturally feel a 
deep interest in his welfare, and would be watching 
over him, laboring and praying for his salvation. 
These persons would be much more likely than any 
others in the spirit world to know just when the 
sinner became penitent, and then, seeing that their 
prayers had been heard, that their labors had been 
rewarded, and that their loved one, whom they had 
feared would be lost, was coming to join them in 
their mansions of bliss, they would be sure to feel 
and to express a great amount of joy. If, then, the 
rejoicing be not done by these, by whom is it done ? 



104 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

Of necessity, it must be done on each occasion, either 
by all the inhabitants of heaven, or else by certain 
individuals only who have special reasons for rejoic- 
ing. But could it be done by all? Could untold 
billions of spirits, variously occupied, and in various 
places, all at the very same moment take cognizance 
of each individual case of penitence upon earth ? In 
order to do this it would evidently be necessary for 
every inhabitant of heaven to have, at all times, a 
perfect knowledge of every action of every individual 
on earth, and of every circumstance surrounding 
him. Such knowledge, however, would be infinite, 
and hence could not be and is not possessed by 
finite beings, such as angels and " the spirits of just 
men made perfect." Since, then, the inhabitants of 
heaven cannot possibly all have knowledge of any one 
case of repentance, it follows, of necessity, that they 
cannot, and that they do not, all rejoice over any 
"one sinner that repenteth." 

Suppose, however, that the countless hosts of 
heaven could, all at the same moment, have knowl- 
edge of every case of repentance on earth, would they, 
think you, on each of these occasions, all break forth 
together into ecstasies of joy? If so, would they 
have leisure for any other occupation, or room for 
any other joy ? "Would they ever get to rest from 
these rejoicings ? Is there not some case of repent- 
ance on hand all the time ? And would not this one 
source of joy, continuing thus ceaselessly and for- 
ever, finally become so common and so monotonous 
as to excite no special interest at all ? 

Suppose that the entire population of the earth 
could all, at the same moment, know that a certain 



in god's general government. 105 

sinner, a Hottentot, a Digger Indian, or an Esqui- 
mau, for instance, had repented, would any consid- 
erable number of them break forth into ecstasies of 
joy? When they hear of it, do the most zealous 
Christians among us ever give a second thought to 
any such case of repentance ? And is it reasonable 
to suppose that the inhabitants of heaven feel much 
greater interest in such cases than do the inhabitants 
of earth ? 

From all this it is evident that the joy over any 
" one sinner that repenteth " must be confined prin- 
cipally to the comparatively few who have, in that 
particular case, some special reasons for rejoicing. 
This, indeed, is certainly the view which Jesus means 
to teach. Commencing at the fourth verse of the 
chapter in which the language in question is found, 
and including the tenth, which I have already quoted, 
we read : " What man of you having an hundred 
sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the 
ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that 
which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath 
found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. 
And when he cometh home, he calleth together his 
friends and neighbors, saying unto them : Rejoice 
with me ; for I have found my sheep which was lost. 
I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven 
over one sinner that repenteth, more than over 
ninety and nine just persons which need no repent- 
ance. Either what woman having ten pieces of 
silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle 
and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she 
find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth 
her friends and her neighbors together, saying, Re- 



106 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

joice with me, for I have found the piece which I had 
lost. Likewise I say unto you, there is joy in the 
presence of the angels of God over one sinner that 
repenteth." 

Jesus uses these two illustrations not only to 
establish the fact that there is joy " in heaven over 
one sinner that repenteth," but also to establish the 
fact that the rejoicing is done by the friends and the 
neighbors of the party thus repenting. In both of 
these illustrations Jesus represents the rejoicing as 
being done exclusively by the interested parties 
themselves, and their friends and neighbors. He 
then declares that the rejoicing in heaven is done 
"likewise," or in the same manner. This settles the 
question. Indeed, your own hearts tell you that my 
views on this subject are correct. 

You all cherish a pleasing hope, if not an abiding 
faith, that after your toils and sorrows of life are past 
you will join your loved ones in a land of bliss — in 
the bright abodes where they now dwell. You hope 
and expect, too, that they will remember you still, 
and love you as they loved while yet on earth. You 
hope and expect that your parents will still love you 
as their child, your children as their father or their 
mother. Is not all of this true ? Do you not also 
hope and expect that these loved ones will be the 
first to greet you on the other shore of the great river 
of death, and to welcome you to their beautiful man- 
sions of fadeless bliss ? And would not your antici- 
pated joys of heaven be greatly dimmed if you were 
to learn that this could never be, that your loved 
ones would never recognize you again, and that they 
would feel no more joy upon your arrival among them 



in god's general government. 107 

than they would upon the arrival of a Digger Indian, 
an Esquimau, or a Hottentot ? Do not your own 
hearts, then, tell you that Spiritualism is a glorious 
truth, when it teaches that these fond hopes of your 
yearning hearts are well founded, and that your 
parents, your children, your loved ones all, with their 
radiant faces, will, indeed, be the first to come in 
their robes of snow, on their wings of light, to wel- 
come you to the fadeless joys of their beautiful 
homes ? In order, therefore, that this great joy may 
exist in heaven, Spiritualism, as you see, is an abso- 
lute necessity. 

So far as the truth or the nature of Spiritualism is 
concerned, however, it makes but little difference 
whether, on any one occasion, the rejoicing in ques- 
tion be done by all the inhabitants of heaven, or only 
by the friends and the relatives of the particular 
" sinner that repenteth." If it be done by all, then 
the friends and the relatives of each penitent are in- 
cluded, and the fact that they all know exactly when 
to rejoice over the repentance of any particular sinner 
is proof positive that a constant correspondence is 
being carried on between our world or condition and 
their own. The fact, too, that they rejoice at all 
" over one sinner that repenteth, " is proof equally 
positive that they take a deep interest in the affairs 
of this world. 

Since all these things are true — since our friends 
in heaven know just what we are doing, and since 
they so greatly rejoice when any one of us is brought 
to repentance, can we reasonably doubt that they do 
all in their power to bring about that repentance ? 
"Would they see us go down to eternal ruin without 



108 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

making an effort to save us ? Even the rich man in 
hell tried to save those he loved on earth. And 
'would our friends in heaven do less for us ? That 
they do at least pray for us, we learn from Rev. v, 8, 
in which we read of four and twenty elders, who 
minister before the throne of God, and who have 
" golden vials full of odors, which are the prayers of 
saints." 

These elders are human spirits, representatives of 
the glorified saints in heaven ; and since we cannot 
reasonably suppose that these glorified saints need 
longer to offer prayers in their own behalf, we are 
bound to admit that the prayers which they are 
offering are in behalf of persons still upon earth. 
These prayers may proceed directly from saints on 
earth, or, which is far more likely, from saints in 
heaven, in behalf of their friends on earth. Be this 
as it may, however, the prayers, in either case, reach 
God through the elders, the more perfect of the 
glorified spirits that minister around his throne. 

The doctrine that the saints in heaven do thus, 
receive our prayers, and present them to God, to- 
gether with their own intercessions in our behalf, 
always has been held, as an article faith, by the great 
body of the Christian church. Every Catholic, and 
every member of the Greek church must believe it ; 
and, although Protestants are not now required to do 
so, many of them nevertheless do believe it. Its 
rejection, indeed, for a long time after the so-called 
Reformation, formed no part of Protestantism. 
Bitter as he was against the Catholic church, Luther, 
in regard to this doctrine, was in full harmony with 
her. He says : " Who can deny that God works 



in god's general government. 109 

great miracles at the tombs of the saints ? I, there- 
fore, with the whole Catholic church, hold that the 
saints are to be honored and invoked by us." In his 
admonitions to dying persons he says : " Let no one 
omit to call upon the blessed Virgin and the angels 
and saints, that they may intercede with God for 
them at that instant." Many others, also, of the 
great lights of Protestantism have likewise declared 
their full belief in this doctrine. Indeed, its truth 
was never seriously called in question by any consid- 
erable number till King Edward's uncle, the Duke 
of Somerset, and his part}', from motives of avarice 
and ambition, engaged in a relentless war against the 
Catholic church. For political effect they then re- 
jected this doctrine. They expected, and correctly, 
too, that after its rejection by themselves, they 
should be able to render the Catholics odious in the 
eyes of the ignorant masses, by charging them with 
idolatry in the invocation of saints. By thus reject- 
ing one of the fundamental, one of the most beautiful 
and elevating, doctrines of the Bible, and of the 
Christian church, these self-styled reformers, 
throughout all Protestantism, sowed the seeds of 
infidelity which are now bearing abundant harvests. 
These arguments then urged by these semi-infidel 
objectors, and still urged by their semi-infidel fol- 
lowers, against this beautiful doctrine of the com- 
munion of saints on earth with saints in heaven, if 
carried out, would effectually overthrow not only the 
Catholic church, but also the whole system of Chris- 
tianity, and, indeed, of every other religion. These 
men then argued, "as you argue now, that since God 
can, he necessarily does, receive the prayers of his 



110 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

children on earth, directly and in person ; and that 
consequently all those doctrines must necessarily be 
false and absurd which represent him as receiving 
them by proxy, or through the agency of saints, of 
angels, or of any other third parties. Taking 
up this argument, infidels can very easily prove 
that, since God can, he necessarily does, make known 
his will to men directly and in person, and that con- 
sequently all those doctrines must, of necessity, be 
false and absurd which represent him as communi- 
cating his will to men by proxy, or through the 
agency of angels, of prophets, of apostles, of evan- 
gelists, of preachers, or of any other third parties. 
Admitting the correctness of your argument, then, 
you must see clearly that you have furnished infidel- 
ity with a weapon with which it can effectually 
overthrow the whole fabric of your religion. But is 
your argument a logical one ? 

Messages, passing backward and forward between 
two parties, always are, or at least always may be, 
conveyed in both directions through the same chan- 
nel. If, then, it be either improper or impracticable 
for a message to pass through a certain channel in 
one direction, it is evidently just as improper or just 
as impracticable, for one to pass through the same 
channel in the opposite direction. If, therefore, in 
teaching that God receives the prayers and other 
messages of men to himself, through saints, angels, 
and other third parties, as his agents, the Catholics 
teach an absurd or an improper doctrine, what kind 
of a doctrine do you teach, when you represent him 
as sending all his own messages to men through such 
third parties ? If men can, and do, without the aid 



in god's general government. Ill 

of third parties, get their messages all safely through 
to God, cannot he manage, in the same way, to get 
his messages all safely through to men ? 

You teach that God employs legions of angels, and 
whole armies of prophets, preachers, and other 
agents, to convey his messages to men. At the same 
time you teach that he never has these messengers 
bear back the messages of men to himself. Can 
these two doctrines be reconciled with each other ? 
Can messengers be necessary in the one direction, 
and not in the other? Can you advance a single 
argument in favor of employing agents to bear mes- 
sages in the one direction, which will not with equal 
weight bear in favor of employing these same or 
similar agents to bear messages in the opposite 
direction ? Can you advance a single argument 
against the employing of messengers in the one direc- 
tion which will not bear with equal weight against 
the employing of them in the other? Do not the 
two doctrines rest upon precisely the same founda- 
tion? In rejecting one of them, then, have you not 
virtually condemned the principle upon which they 
both equally rest ? And does not the condemnation 
of that principle — the general principle of agency— 
effectually overturn every known system of religion ? 
Are your teachings, then, anything else than Infidel- 
ity in disguise ? Are you not aware that, by your 
teachings and your wranglings, you are doing more 
to make Infidels than are the writings of all the 
Paines, the Humes, the Yolneys, and the Voltaires 
that ever lived ? 

The Bible everywhere teaches that God's dealings 
with men are almost entirely carried on through 



112 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

agents to whom he delegates the necessary powers. 
This method of dealing through agents was evidently 
adopted, not because God needs the aid of any of his 
creatures, but because just such employment as he 
gives them is essential to their improvement and 
happiness ; and because, if they were daily to come 
into direct communication with him, they would in- 
evitably cease to regard him with that awful reverence 
which is his due. " Familiarity breeds contempt." 
God could himself have named all the living things 
which he had made, and could have dressed and kept 
in order the garden which he had planted, and yet 
he saw fit to have all of this done by Adam. In one 
moment of time, and by a mere effort of his will, he 
could himself have made the ark, and yet he saw fit 
to have Noah work upon it for one hundred and 
twenty years. He could himself have known, and he 
doubtless did know, exactly what the Sodomites were 
doing on a certain occasioD, and yet he saw fit to 
send messengers to ascertain the facts and report 
them to him. He could himself have brought all the 
plagues upon Egypt, he could have divided the waters 
of the Red Sea, etc., and yet he saw fit to have all 
these things done by his agent Moses. 

"When upon Mount Sinai, God could himself have 
communicated all his commandments and instructions 
directly to the people, and could in like manner have 
received directly the people's messages to himself. 
All these communications, however, as well in the 
one direction as in the other, he saw fit to have made 
through his agent Moses, who was kept quite busy 
sometimes, climbing the mountain to report the 
people's messages to God, and, at other times, de- 



in god's general government. 113 

scending it again to report God's messages to the 
people. When in the wilderness the people cried for 
water, God could himself have heard, and doubtless 
did hear, that cry ; and yet he saw fit to notice it 
only when it was reported to him by Moses. Even 
then, he administered relief only through this same 
agent. 

On many occasions God's anger was so kindled 
against the children of Israel, because of their 
rebelliousness, that he threatened to utterly destroy 
them all. On each of these occasions, however, he 
saw fit to let himself be persuaded by Moses to forego 
his contemplated vengeance, and to spare the people. 
Moses accomplished this persuasion simply by show- 
ing him how bad it would look in him to thus fly 
into a rage, and destroy his own chosen people, whom 
he had sworn to protect, and by reminding him of 
what his enemies would say of so rash a proceeding. 
God suffered himself to be controlled by these argu- 
ments, and yet he doubtless understood them as well 
before they were repeated to him by Moses as he did 
afterward. It is not at all probable that he really 
needed either the information which Moses gave him, 
or the ridicule which Moses cast upon his proposed 
course of conduct. It is not at all probable that 
Moses was really the abler reasoner of the two, as on 
all these occasions he seems to have been. By all 
this God evidently designed simply to give Moses 
such exercise and experience as were really necessary 
to render him what he was destined to become, a 
mighty reasoner, a wonderful law-giver, a grand model 
for all nations and for all ages. 

When present upon Mount Sinai, God could have 



114 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

permitted the people to approach him, and to offer 
in person their prayers, their praises, their sacrifices, 1 
etc. Instead of permitting them to do this, however, ' 
he threatened them with instant death if they should 
so much as touch the border of the mountain while 
he was upon it. Even the priests and the elders 
were required to remain at a distance. In only a 
very few instances were any, except Moses, permitted 
to approach the divine presence. Indeed, the whole 
history of God's dealings with men goes to prove 
that, however near he may have been to the people, he 
has never dealt directly with them, and has never 
suffered them to deal directly with him. He has 
always sent his communications to men through 
agents, and has always required men to send their 
communications, their prayers, their sacrifices, etc., 
to him through the same agents. To have borne 
messages himself in either direction would have con- 
stituted him an angel or messenger, and this he has 
never proposed to be. He requires his creatures to 
serve him. He never serves them. Were he to come 
in person after your prayers and other communica- 
tions, he would be your servant. This you cannot 
expect him to be. 

The people never could present their own prayers, 
their own sacrifices, etc., in an acceptable manner, 
and never could make atonement for themselves. 
On one occasion some of them tried to present their 
own offerings, and God destroyed them for their 
sacrilegious presumption. The people always had 
to bring their offerings, of whatever kind, to one of 
God's agents or ministers, and have him offer them, 
in their stead, and thus make atonement for them. 



in god's general government. 115 

On all these occasions the same priest that pre- 
sented the people's offerings to God, also, in return, 
bestowed God's blessing npon the people. In Lev. 
ix, 7, we read : " And Moses said unto Aaron, Go 
unto the altar . . . and offer the offering of the 
people, and make an atonement for them, as the Lord 
commanded." Aaron did this, and then, as we learn 
in the twenty-second verse, he "lifted up his hand 
toward the people, and blessed them." The high 
priest alone, and he only once a year and after the 
most thorough purifications, was permitted to enter 
into the immediate presence of God in the most holy 
place. 

Before God, the prophets, the priests, and other 
agents, stood as the representatives of the people, 
and in that capacity they offered to God the petitions 
of the people, their sacrifices, etc., and did all other 
things which the people themselves would have done 
had they been permitted to act in person. Before 
the people these same agents stood as the represent- 
atives of God himself, and in that capacity they pro- 
claimed God's will to the people, made known His 
promises, threatened them with his judgments, im- 
posed his penalties, or bestowed his blessings upon 
them, pardoned their sins, and did all other things 
which God himself would have done had he seen fit 
to act in person. 

All these things, are so clearly taught in the Bible 
that from me they require no further illustration. 
The only question now is : Has God ever ceased to 
deal thus with men, through agents, and come to 
deal with them in person, as a man deals with his 
fellow-men ? To this question no intelligent person 



116 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

can give other than a negative answer. Since the 
principles which govern God's actions can never be 
outside of himself — since they form, so to speak, a 
part of his own being — they must, of necessity, be as 
unchangeable as his own nature. Hence it follows 
that his method of dealing with men, through agents, 
though it may have been changed in form to suit the 
changed conditions of men, can never have been 
changed in principle. As well might you assert that 
his method of governing the material universe by 
fixed laws, by physical forces, has been changed for 
some other method. To assert a change in the prin- 
ciple of his government is simply to assert a change 
in his own character. And dare you assert any such 
change as this ? 

You teach correctly that God still communicates 
his word to men through agents, just as he did four 
thousand years ago. You teach correctly that mill- 
ions of Bibles and thousands of preachers are neces- 
sary in order that all men may receive that word. 
And yet, while you teach that all these agents are 
necessary to convey God's word to men, you absurdly 
teach that no agents at all are necessary to convey 
men's word to God ; that men can, and do, in person 
hand in their own prayers and other communications 
directly to God himself. But is God everywhere to 
hear, and nowhere to speak ? Do not exactly the 
same space and the same obstacles intervene between 
men and God as intervene between God and men ? 
If, then, men can speak directly through this space 
and these obstacles to God, cannot he do the same 
to them? Do not the communications from the one 
side require for their transmittal precisely the same 



in god's general government. 117 

means as are required by those from the other side ? 
Are they not all conveyed, then, by one and the same 
grand and indivisible system of communication? What 
would you think of a government which should, at 
great expense to the people, provide thousands of 
mails to carry letters, papers, etc., in one direction, 
but which would not permit these mails to carry any- 
thing at all in the opposite direction ? And do you 
not blasphemously represent God as acting in this 
absurd manner ? If messengers between God and 
men are necessary at all, are they not bound to be 
equally necessary in both directions ? If such mes- 
sengers are not necessary at all, are not your 
prophets, your preachers, etc., all shameless impos- 
tors, and your churches monstrous swindles ? 

If the system of agency which we are considering 
be designed, not as a necessity, but merely as a 
means of giving elevating employment, for the benefit 
of those engaged in it, would not the benefit be as 
great in carrying prayers, etc., from men to God as 
it is in carrying commandments, etc., from God to 
men ? Wherein, then, is the difference ? Simply in 
the pay. If the conveying of men's prayers, etc., to 
God paid as many priests, and paid them as well, as 
does the conveying of God's word to men, does any 
one doubt that there would be just as much of it 
done ? In that case, would there not be just as much 
need of messengers to God as there now is for 
messengers from him ? 

Be all this as it may, however, Jesus testifies in 
the most positive manner that God's method of car- 
rying on his government through agents was continued 
unchanged, from the Jewish into the Christian Dis- 



118 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

pensation, and that it is to continue unchanged during 
all time on earth, and during all eternity in heaven. 
For all the intercommunications between the spirit 
world and our own, then, the agency of spirits is 
necessary, and Spiritualism is still, as it always has 
been, the grand medium through which God's gov- 
ernment is carried on. 

In the first place, it is to be observed that, while 
in the body, Jesus never acted in any but his human 
character. Had he acted in his divine character, his 
example would have been totally worthless to us, since 
none of us aspire to godship, and since none of us 
could ever hope to imitate God, much less to equal 
or to surpass him. Every act of Jesus was the act 
of a man, and was intended as a model for us, not 
only to imitate but to equal and even to surpass. 
While astonishing the people with his works, Jesus 
says: " Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that be- 
lieveth on me, the works that I do shall he do also ; 
and greater works than these shall he do." This 
declaration he substantially repeats on several occa- 
sions, and then, in his last earthly meeting with his 
disciples, he commands them not only to do these 
works themselves, but also to teach all nations to do 
them, and promises that in the doing of these works 
he will be with " them that believe," " alway, even 
unto the end of the world." 

Jesus also emphatically disclaims the possession 
of any power not delegated to him by God the. 
father. In John v, 19, 20, he says : " Verily, verily, 
I say unto you, the son can do nothing of himself, 
but what he seeth the father do : for what things 
soever he doeth, these also doeth the son likewise. 



in god's general government. 119 

For the father loveth the son, and showeth him all 
the things that himself doeth ; and he will show him 
greater works than these that ye may marvel." In 
the twenty-second verse he says : " For the father 
judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment 
to the son." In Luke x, 22, he says : " All things 
are delivered unto me of my father." 

Thus you see how full were the powers which God 
bestowed upon Jesus, and which Jesus, in turn, be- 
stowed upon "them that believe." These powers 
enabled their possessors to heal diseases, to cast out 
devils, to pardon sins, to raise the dead, to com- 
mune with spirits, and to do all other things which 
Jesus himself, their model, in his human character 
had been accustomed to do. Since all his acts were 
meant to be models for men, none of them required 
greater powers than are delegated to men. Indeed, 
as I have already quoted, he bestowed upon the true 
believer power to do even " greater works than 
these." If, therefore, you hear that some one is per- 
forming greater works than were ever performed by 
Jesus, do not rashly condemn the report until you 
have given the matter a fair investigation. If Jesus 
spoke the truth, such works must be done. He does 
not say that such works may possibly be done by 
some unknown believer in some remote corner of the 
globe, but emphatically declares that such works 
" shall " be done by the true believer, whoever he 
may be, whenever he may live, and in whatever 
country. If, then, your neighbors, Mr. Smith, Mr. 
Brown, Mr. Jones, and others, be true believers, they 
are sure to be doing some of the works which as 
"sigjis shall follow them that believe." They are 



120 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

sure to be healing the sick, speaking in unknown 
tongues, communing with spirits, etc., and, very 
probably, in consequence of these works, they may 
be also raising the devil among the church-going 
people of the neighborhood. If you do not like to 
have such things going on in your vicinity, all you 
have to do is either to move away into some neigh- 
borhood in which there are no true believers, or else 
pitch into Jesus, who brought it about that these 
" signs shall " inevitably "follow them that believe." 

In Luke x, 16, on sending out these seventy dis- 
ciples, Jesus says : " He that heareth you, heareth 
me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me ; and 
he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me." 
On several other occasions he substantially repeats 
these same declarations. From all this you see how 
fully the true minister of the gospel is empowered to 
act as the representative of Jesus, and through him 
as the representative of God himself. 

In Matt, x, 20, Jesus says : " For it is not ye that 
speak, but the spirit of your father, which speaketh 
in you." The apostles, then, were simply speaking 
mediums. In the eighth verse of the same chapter 
Jesus commands these mediums to "heal the sick, 
cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils ; 
freely ye have received, freely give." From this we 
learn that the apostles were developed in all the 
various phases of spiritual mediumship. You will 
also notice that the instructions given on this occa- 
sion are not merely permissory, but are mandatory. 
The apostles not only may, and can, but absolutely 
must perform all these works. Among many other 
things, they all must "raise the dead/' But how 



in god's general goveenment. 121 

could they " raise the dead " without calling back 
the spirits of the dead from the abodes to which 
they had gone in the spirit w T orld ? And would not 
such a calling back of the spirits of the dead be a 
phase of pure Spiritualism ? Does not Jesus, then, 
command Spiritualism to be practiced by " them 
that believe," " alway, even unto the end of the 
world ? " And has this command to " raise the dead " 
ever been fulfilled ? I contend that it has ; not in 
the two or three instances in which the apostles are 
said to have resuscitated the bodies of apparently 
dead persons, but in the millions of instances in 
which Spiritualists and others of " them that believe " 
have raised the dead in the form of spirits. 

If, however, by the raising of the dead we are to 
understand the resuscitating of absolutely dead 
bodies, then the command never has been, never can 
be, and consequently never will be fulfilled. In that 
case the giving of such a command was a downright 
absurdity. Jesus knew very well that the revivifying 
of such bodies was rarely, if ever, within the limits 
of possibility. And would he, knowing this, have 
bound such an impossibility, as an unavoidable duty, 
upon all the apostles, and, through them, upon all 
the nations of the world ? 

You claim that the command in question was ful- 
filled by one or two of the apostles, in the revivifying 
of two or three dead bodies. As well might you 
claim that the commands to heal the sick, to cleanse 
the lepers, to. cast out devils, and to preach the 
gospel, were all fulfilled by one or two of the apostles 
in the healing of two or three sick persons, the 
cleansing of two or three lepers, the casting out of 



122 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

two or three devils, and the preaching of the gospel 
to two or three persons. According to your teachings 
the whole commission given by Jesus was fulfilled 
by the works of two or three of the apostles. "What 
a farce, then, you make of Christianity ! Did not 
Jesus, in all cases, inseparably connect the doing of 
these works with the preaching of the gospel? With- 
out fear of successful contradiction, I contend that 
he did, and that every man is an impostor who pre- 
tends to preach the gospel, without being endued 
with power from on high to do these works. Were 
not these works the things that Jesus principally 
dwelt upon when sending out the apostles ? Were 
not these works, as well as the gospel which they 
were to accompany, to be blessings to all nations and 
to all ages ? And was the revivifying of two or three 
dead bodies, in Judea, and the causing of them again 
to suffer the pangs of death, any great blessing to all 
nations and to all ages? So of the healing of two or 
three sick persons, the cleansing of two or three 
lepers, etc. Would these things be of any special 
benefit to the balance of mankind ? Did not Jesus 
foresee all things ? If he did, and if he foresaw 
that, in all future ages, only two or three dead per- 
sons ever could be, or ever would be, raised from the 
dead, would he, think you, have so frequently, and 
so earnestly, enjoined the raising of the dead, as a 
duty, upon all his followers of all nations and of all 
ages ? Would these few cases have been of so vast 
importance as to be incorporated, as an essential 
element, into the system of religion which he was 
founding ? And did Jesus, in the distribution of his 
favors, propose to be unjust and partial ? Did he 



in god's general government. 123 

have in view two or three special favorites whom he 
proposed to have raised from the dead, while he left 
all the other dead to crumble into dust? Am I under 
any obligation to love or to praise him for having 
some unknown Jew raised from the dead eighteen 
hundred years ago, when he will have nothing of the 
kind done for my own child, the light of my own 
home, whose cold form lies before me ? What kind 
of a being do you make of him by your absurd infidel 
teachings ? 

The death and the decay of the body are inevitable 
processes of nature, and Jesus never made it a duty 
to undo what nature, in her legitimate action, has 
done. He never meant that we should raise up or 
revivify bodies once absolutely dead. "It is 
appointed to men once to die," says Paul. Your 
view of the doctrine of raising the dead would make 
them die more than once. By raising a man from 
the dead every time he died we might make him die 
a thousand deaths, and there is nothing more to 
hinder us from raising him a second, a third, or a 
thousandth time, than there is to hinder us from 
raising him the first time. And do you think that 
many persons, and especially the righteous, when 
once in the spirit world, would regard it as any great 
favor to be called back to again inhabit their old 
body, so full of infirmities, and to be subjected a sec- 
ond time to the agonies of death ? Is it not evident, 
then, that, by the raising of the dead, Jesus means 
the calling up of spirits — the bringing into com- 
munion of the saints on earth with the saints in 
heaven ? And does this not make Spiritualism the 
most glorious element in the Christian religion? 



124 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

In Matt, xvi, 18, 19, Jesus says : " And I say also 
unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock 
I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall 
not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the 
keys of the kingdom of heaven : and whatsoever thou 
shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, and 
whatever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed 
in heaven." In another place he gives to all of his 
disciples this same power to bind and to loose things 
on earth and in heaven. From this we learn that, 
both on earth and in heaven, God's government was 
still to be conducted on the principle of agency. As 
God's agents, the apostles were to exercise a certain 
amount of authority in both worlds ; and in order 
that they might be able to do this — in order that the 
binding and the loosing might be carried on simul- 
taneously in both — it was evidently necessary that 
there should be a constant correspondence carried on 
between the two worlds. The carrying on of this cor- 
respondence again renders Spiritualism an absolute 
necessity in God's general government. 

In John xx, 21-23, we read : " Then said Jesus 
unto them again, Peace be unto you : as my father 
hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had 
said this he breathed on them, and said unto them, 
Receive ye the Holy Ghost ; "Whosesoever sins ye 
remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whoseso- 
ever sins ye retain, they are retained." From this 
we learn that in receiving the Holy Ghost the apos- 
tles came into possession of the very same power by 
which Jesus himself had performed all his wonderful 
works. This power, as we have already seen, enabled 
them to heal the sick, to raise the dead, to commune 



in god's genekal government. 125 

with spirits, to pardon sins, and to do all the other 
works which Jesus did, and even " greater works 
than these." 

And now the question arises : Did the apostles 
receive these powers, and the duties which accom- 
panied them, in their individual, or in their 
representative, capacities? If in their individual 
capacities, then, of course, at their death, all these 
powers necessarily ceased ; and with them, of course, 
also ceased all those duties, including the preaching 
of the gospel, which were expressly founded on these 
powers, and which were never required, and never 
authorized to be performed by any to whom these 
powers were wanting. If, in his individual capacity, 
Peter was made the foundation of the church, and 
the possessor of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, 
then it follows that at his death the church, for want 
of a foundation, necessarily fell ; and that the keys 
of the kingdom of heaven were lost, or, at least, ren- 
dered utterly useless, for want of some one to hold 
them. 

If all this be true, and it must be according to your 
own teachings, then it is evident that the Christian 
church ceased to exist 1800 years ago, and that ever 
since the death of Peter the gates of the kingdom of 
heaven have remained just as he left them, open to 
all, or closed to all, without any distinction what- 
ever. No Protestant dares name Peter's successor. 
Thus you see that, by your own teachings, you are 
left without any church at all, and without any hope 
of salvation, unless you propose to steal into heaven 
through the gates left unguarded by the death of 
Peter, and the loss of his keys. 



126 SPIKITUALISM A NECESSITY 

If, however, as Jesus plainly teaches, Peter and the 
other apostles received their powers and their in- 
structions in their representative or official capacities, 
then, of course, those powers and instructions would 
be transmitted, unimpaired, to their successors in 
office. In this case the Christian church still remains 
firm as the rock on which it was founded, " aid the 
gates of hell shall not prevail against it." In this 
case, too, remain, of course, unimpaired both the 
power and the duty to heal the sick, to raise the 
dead — by calling up spirits — to cast out devils, to 
preach the gospel, to pardon sins, and to do all the 
other works which Jesus commanded. In other 
words, both the power and the duty remain to prac- 
tice every phase of Spiritualism. 

But do you possess the powers which were con- 
ferred upon the apostles and their successors ? You 
admit that you do not. And without possessing any 
of their powers can you perform any of their duties ? 
Were the duties ever separate from the powers ? If 
not, what are you, what can you be, but detected im- 
postors ? You are forced to the disagreeable alter- 
native of either denying the existence of any true 
church at all, or of admitting that your hated rivals 
are that church. In either case you inevitably reduce 
to a set of barefaced pretenders. 

In Matt, xix, 28, we read : " And Jesus said unto 
them, Yerily, verily, I say unto you that ye which 
have followed me in the regeneration, when the son 
of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also 
shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve 
tribes of Israel." In Luke xxii, 29, 30, we have this 
same promise in different words : " And I appoint 



in god's general government. 127 

unto you a kingdom, as iny father hath appointed 
unto me ; that ye may eat and drink at my table in 
my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve 
tribes of Israel." This promise was made in reply 
to Peter, who wished to know what he and the other 
disciples were to receive in exchange for the houses, 
the fish-nets, and the other property which they had 
been compelled to abandon in order to follow Jesus. 

In making this promise Jesus either meant what 
he said, or else he meant to cruelly deceive the 
simple-minded and confiding men to whom he made it. 
They certainly understood the kingdoms, the thrones, 
etc., promised to them, to be just as real as were the 
houses, the fish nets, etc., given in exchange. Jesus 
knew very well how they understood his promise, 
and yet, so far from correcting that understanding, 
as he certainly should have done, had it been an 
erroneous one, he confirmed it on several occasions. 
If, then, Jesus was not a deceiver, we have in this 
matter the most positive evidence that in heaven as 
well as on earth God's government is carried on by 
men whom he appoints as his agents or represent- 
atives. You are bound to admit that, if Jesus spoke 
the truth, the twelve apostles actually do, at this 
present time, " sit upon twelve thrones judging the 
twelve tribes of Israel." 

It is an undeniable fact that in his dealings with 
men God is governed by his desire for their improve- 
ment and their happiness. It is also an equally 
Undeniable fact that, without a change in God's own 
nature, there can be no change in that desire, or in 
the actions which proceed from it. But how does 
God promote the improvement and the happiness of 



128 SPIKITUALISM A NECESSITY 

men? Simply by giving them ennobling and happi- 
fying employments. In what other way could he 
render them either better or happier? And what 
could be more ennobling, what could render us more 
supremely happy, than to be constantly engaged in 
doing God's work, in helping to carry on his govern- 
ment, in laboring for the improvement of our fellow- 
men in time, and for their happiness in eternity. 
Hence it is that in both worlds God has countless 
numbers of men acting as teachers, as judges, etc., 
while he has millions of others acting as messengers, 
or angels, between the two worlds. Indeed, in his 
goodness and wisdom, God has given us all, whether 
in the body or out of it, something to do, if we will, 
for our own improvement, in the carrying on of his 
general government. Take from good men all those 
ennobling employments which in this life God gives 
them, and on what would then depend their further 
improvement, and their continued happiness ? And 
if such employments are so necessary to our im- 
provement and happiness in this life, can they be 
less necessary in the world of spirits? Is there, 
beyond the change called death, no such thing as 
further improvement ? And does death deprive a 
good man of all that unselfish love of his kind which 
renders him so god-like while yet on earth ? Does 
his entrance into heaven drive from his soul all desire 
for the well-being of his loved ones on earth — all 
willingness to labor, or even to pray, for their salva- 
tion ? 

For forty long years, without any hope of earthly 
reward, Moses labored and suffered for his ungrate- 
ful and rebellious people. On several occasions, as 



in god's general government. 129 

we have already seen, his interpositions, alone saved 
them from utter destruction at the hands of their 
offended God. On more than one occasion, too, God 
offered to make of him a greater and mightier people 
than were they. Moses, however, loving his people 
more than he loved himself, prayed God to spare 
them, or to let him perish with them. The last days 
on earth of this wonderful man were spent in giving 
warnings and instructions to his people, and in 
prayers to God for their welfare. And dare you de- 
liberately assert that his entrance into heaven robbed 
his great heart of all that wonderful depth of love 
and solicitude which he felt for them while yet on 
earth ? Dare you deliberately assert that he never- 
more cared what befell them, and that he never 
again interceded for them at the throne of the God 
he loved? And dare you deliberately assert that 
such intercessions, if made, were of no avail ? Would 
God heed them when coming from Moses, a man on 
earth, and then despise them when coming from 
Moses, a glorified saint in heaven ? 

I might also ask these same questions in regard to 
that other equally wonderful man, the prophet 
Elijah. After reading of all that he did, and of all 
that he suffered, for his people, dare you deliberately 
assert that by his translation into heaven without 
undergoing the change called death he lost all love 
for his people, and all desire for their well-being? 

When, upon the mount of transfiguration, Jesus met 
Moses and Elijah, did he find them both totally des- 
titute of all interest in the welfare of those for whose 
salvation himself was then about to die ? Would he, 
at so solemn a time, have sought an interview with 



130 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

them if they had been thus cold, thus heartless, thus 
totally dead to all the god-like emotions which were 
then welling up in his own great bosom ? When on 
earth, were they not very much like Jesus ? And 
would the influences surrounding them in heaven 
cause them to thus degenerate and to become so 
unlike him ? If not, would not these two great men, 
these two renowned spirits, still labor and pray for 
the welfare of the inhabitants of earth ? 

You believe that it is right for good men on earth 
to labor and to pray for the salvation of those they 
love. You believe that they neglect a great duty 
when they fail so to do. Can it be wrong, then, for 
these same men to do these same things in a more 
perfect manner after they have become saints in 
heaven ? And would they not, in their glorified 
state, have more leisure for these works of love than 
they had when burdened with the toils and cares of 
life in their earthly condition? 

You believe that it is right for us to ask the prayers 
of good men on earth. Can it be wrong, then, to ask 
the more perfect prayers of these same men or of 
others after they have become glorified saints in 
heaven? If it be idolatry, as you teach that it is, to 
invoke the interposition of the saints and the angels 
in heaven, are you not guilty of practicing a much 
lower form of idolatry in invoking the intercession 
of your poor erring friends upon earth ? Can it be 
right to invoke the aid of a lower being, and wrong 
to invoke the aid of a higher ? If so, then, of course, 
the lower the being or the object is that we invoke, 
the better is our act ; and, conversely, the higher the 
being is that we invoke, the worse is our act. On 



in god's general government. 131 

this principle those pagans who worship monkeys, 
serpents, etc., are wiser and better than you are, who 
worship the most high God himself. 

But can a doctrine be true which involves absurd- 
ities so monstrous ? If it be right, as you teach that 
it is, to invoke the aid of God, the highest, and of 
man, the lowest, of intelligent beings, how can it be 
wrong to invoke the aid of saints, of angels, or of any 
other intermediate order of beings ? Can saints and 
angels be too high, when we are invoking a being 
still higher ? Can they be too low, when we are in- 
voking a being still lower? You invoke the two 
extremes, but does safety usually lie in the extremes, 
or between them ? 

Sinners are like sailors clinging to a wreck that is 
fast going to pieces upon the rocks. And since, to 
sailors thus situated, it is right to invoke the aid of 
anything, from a water spaniel to the grandest mon- 
arch of earth, it cannot be wrong in the sinner to 
invoke the aid of any good being, from the lowest 
savage to the highest God. 

You teach that God hears the imperfect prayers of 
men on eartli in behalf of those they love. At your 
revival meetings you call upon all those persons to 
come forward who desire an interest in the prayers 
of those whom, from some unaccountable freak of 
fancy, you are pleased to style " God's people." And 
God either does or does not hear such prayers. If 
he does not hear them, then your teachings are 
false, your revival meetings are frauds, and your- 
selves are impostors. If he does hear them, then it 
devolves upon you to prove that he does not, with 
equal favor, hear the more perfect prayers of the 



132 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

saints and the angels in heaven, in behalf of those 
they love. Is he more pleased with prayers coming 
from the less pure and the less perfect of his chil- 
dren than he is with similar prayers coming from the 
more pure and the more perfect? If he is, then the 
more impure and the more imperfect you are, the 
more certain you are of his favor. It may be from 
this view of the subject that some of you feel so sure 
of reaching heaven. On what other ground can you 
claim that God rejects the puie and perfect prayers 
of the holy Virgin, of the apostles, of the martyrs, of 
the angels, and of the archangels, and yet receives 
the miserable balderdash which you offer up in the 
form of prayer, from very imperfect hearts, and 
which is often wafted to his ear on breath foul from 
undigested food, from unwashed teeth, and from the 
nauseous fumes of cheap tobacco ? Do you see noth- 
ing monstrous, nothing blasphemous, in your doc- 
trine that God's actions can be and are influenced by 
these prayers of yours, while he is utterly impervious 
to the prayers of the countless millions of glorified 
beings who surround his throne ? 

Not long ago four young children stood weeping 
by the 'bedside of their dying mother. Amid their 
sobs they were listening to her faintly whispered 
words, as, for the last time on earth, she prayed God 
to bless and to protect them. Having in turn 
prayed for each of the eldest three, she placed her 
wasted hand upon the little curly head of her young- 
est, a bright, sweet child of only five summers, and 
whispered, " Johnnie, my poor, dear child, mamma 

must leave you, but may God " Here her words 

ceased. Her lifeless hand dropped from his head. 



in god's general government. 133 

Her spirit had gone to him who gave it. The child, 
perceiving that she did not proceed, and having a 
vague sense of the terrible calamity that had fallen 
upon him, cried : " O mamma ! mamma ! pray for 
me, too ! pray for me, too ! " His invocation was to 
the dead, to a disembodied spirit, to a glorified saint 
in heaven. And dare you, because of this invocation, 
stigmatize that innocent child as an idolater ? Was 
it not just as right, and just as proper, for him to 
invoke his mother's intercession, a moment after her 
change, as it was a moment before ? And was it not 
just as right, and just as proper, for that mother to 
finish her prayer in his behalf as a glorified saint in 
heaven as it was for her to begin it as a poor, suffer- 
ing mortal on earth? Can that which is right and 
proper in an erring mortal be wrong and immoral in 
a glorified spirit ? If not, would not that mother be 
sure to finish in heaven the prayer for her child 
which she had begun upon earth ? And dare you 
assert that the last part of that prayer, if offered, was 
not as acceptable to God as was the first ? 

Finally, our friends in heaven, of necessity, either 
do know our affairs, and take an interest in them, or 
they do not. They either do rejoice " over one 
sinner that repenteth," or they do not. They either 
do aid us with their prayers, and their angelic min- 
istrations, or they do not. If they do all these 
things, then is Spiritualism unquestionably a grand, 
a glorious reality, an absolute necessity in the won- 
derfully sublime workings of the government of God. 
Then, in the eloquent language of a Milner, " We 
hold daily and hourly converse, to our unspeakable 
comfort and advantage, with the angelic choirs, with 



134 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

the venerable patriarchs and prophets of ancient 
times, with the heroes of Christianity, the blessed 
apostles and martyrs, and with the bright ornaments 
of its later ages, the Bernards, the Xaviers, the 
Tereses, and the Saleses," and, as he might with 
equal truth have added, with our parents, our 
brothers, our sisters, our children, our loved ones all — 
changed and glorified in their forms and their condi- 
tions, but no less our friends, no less our kindred, 
no less fondly treasured in our hearts, now than they 
were in the days departed, when they were the joys 
and the lights of our earthly homes. 

If, however, after entering heaven, our friends 
never again labor, or even pray, for us, then their 
failure to do so must, of necessity, be either because 
they have lost all desire for our salvation, or else 
because they have lost all liberty to do anything that 
might tend to save us. There can be no other possi- 
ble reason. If they retained both the desire and the 
liberty to labor and to pray for us, would they not be 
sure to do so ? Which have they lost, then, their desire 
for our salvation, or their liberty to even pray for it ? 

If, the moment they enter heaven, our friends 
cease to care whether we are saved or damned, what 
do they become ? Cold, heartless, loveless, emotion- 
less, and, necessarily, joyless beings. Indeed, they 
become worse than the rich man in hell, since he 
still loved his brethren on earth, and prayed that 
warning might be sent them, lest they, too, should 
come to his place of torment. And dare you assert 
that our parents, our children, our dear ones all, on 
entering heaven, universally cease to love us, and to 
pray for us, when even this damned spirit in hell 



in god's general government. 135 

still continued to love his friends on earth, and to do 
all he could to save them ? 

Do you who are parents believe that on entering 
heaven you will lose all love for your children, 
and all desire for their salvation ? If, by praying 
for them, you could save them, or even hope to save 
them, from the unutterable torments of an endless 
hell, and to have them join you amid the fadeless joys, 
the untold glories, of your world of light, would you 
not continue to pray for them just as earnestly as 
you ever prayed for them on earth ? Your own 
hearts tell you that you would. You know that 
God's love, shed abroad in your hearts, even in this 
world of toil and of sorrow, makes you love your 
children more than ever, and more than ever desire 
that they may turn to God, and share with you the 
blissful hope of eternal happiness. And will not 
God's still greater love shed abroad in your hearts, 
will not the still greater joys of heaven itself, still 
heighten your love for your children, and your desire 
for their eternal salvation ? Your own fond hearts 
tell you that they will. The desire, then, to labor 
and to pray for the salvation of their friends on earth 
does not forsake those who enter heaven. If, there- 
fore, they do not thus labor and pray, it must, of 
necessity, be because God prohibits them to engage 
in such labors of love. But dare you bring so blas- 
phemous an accusation against God ? Dare you, 
after a moment's thought, assert that he turns legions 
of devils loose to lead our loved ones to eternal ruin, 
while at the same time he will not permit us, after 
entering heaven, to even pray for those loved ones 
thus endangered ? This is certainly what you thought- 



136 SPIEITUALISM A NECESSITY 

lessly teach. It is the very essence of Protestant 
orthodoxy. But does it not make God a worse being 
than the devil himself? And does it not necessarily 
render heaven a place of indescribable torment ? 

Thus you see that if you have our spirit friends of 
choice cease their labors of love for us, you make 
them worse than the damned ; if you have them 
cease these labors through compulsion, you make 
God worse than the devil ; and if you do not have 
them cease these labors at all, you make Spiritualism 
a grand, a glorious truth, an absolute necessity in 
the government of God. And now, what will you do ? 

In Luke v, 22, we read : " For the father judgeth 
no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the 
son." From this we learn that Jesus is the supreme 
judge of the living and of the dead. To him is com- 
mitted "all judgment," no matter where, and no 
matter concerning whom that judgment is to be exer- 
cised. This unlimited power of judgment constitutes 
him, in reality, a king, and so he evidently regards it, 
since he often speaks of his throne and of his king- 
dom. Say what we may, then, of the superiority of 
republican institutions, we find nothing resembling 
them in the government of heaven. The founders of 
that government were certainly uncompromising 
monarchists, and the government itself is certainly an 
absolute monarchy or despotism, to which we must 
uncomplainingly submit, should we ever in the muta- 
tions of time come under the jurisdiction of that 
government at all. 

Be all this as it may, however, Jesus, as I have 
already elsewhere quoted, says unto his disciples : 
" And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my father 



in god's general government. 137 

hath appointed unto me ; that ... ye may sit 
on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." 
From this we learn that sufficient power to constitute 
each of them a king is delegated by Jesus to certain 
human spirits, whom he associates with himself in, 
the grand work of governing his universal kingdom. 
These associate judges, therefore, or subaltern kings, 
must necessarily differ in their conditions and their 
occupations from the less distinguished inhabitants 
of heaven. Their conditions and their occupations 
must, of necessity, correspond to the dignity of the 
offices to which they have been appointed. For ob- 
vious reasons many persons are pleased to believe 
that in heaven the most incorrigible fool becomes at 
once the equal of the most distinguished philosopher. 
From what we have just seen, however, this doctrine 
is a very fallacious one. Indeed, the Bible every- 
where teaches that there are various grades among 
the inhabitants of heaven. Those persons, then, who 
are content to be fools on earth need not hope to be 
miraculously made philosophers in heaven. " As the 
tree falleth, so it lieth." The fool on earth will be a 
fool in heaven. 

In order to be "judging the twelve tribes of 
Israel," or any other divisions of the inhabitants of 
God's government, the judges must, of necessity, be 
actually hearing and deciding the causes which arise 
among those over whom they preside. Being asso- 
ciated with Jesus in this work, and acting under his 
authority, their mode of judging cannot be different 
from his own. Indeed, in this respect they stand in 
exactly the same relation to him from whom they 
derive their kingdoms and their powers that he 



138 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

stands in relation to God the father, from whom he 
derives his kingdom and his powers. Throughout 
the whole universal government there must, of neces- 
sity, be the most perfect harmony of action. In 
whatever way, then, Jesus is himself occupied, those 
also must be occupied to whom he assigns a portion 
of his own work. If, as supreme judge, he takes 
cognizance of human atfairs, and makes intercession 
for men with the father, these associate judges, 
engaged in the same work, must, of necessity, do the 
same, or must at least intercede with him, as he 
intercedes with the father. In order to do this they 
must, of equal necessity, have a thorough knowledge 
of men and of all their affairs ; and the possession of 
such knowledge on their part involves the necessity 
of a constant correspondence between the inhabitants 
of earth and those of heaven. In any view of the 
case, therefore, Spiritualism again becomes a grand 
and glorious truth, an absolute necessity in God's 
general government. 

In order to escape this conclusion, however, you 
resort to the totally groundless assumption that the 
thrones, the kingdoms, the dignified occupations of 
'judging, etc., are merely figurative thrones, figurative 
kingdoms, figurative occupations, etc., which never 
had any existence in reality. By this subterfuge 
you do, indeed, escape your present difficulty, but 
you thereby fall into a much greater one, since you 
thus make Jesus a liar and a cheat, and equally 
reduce his throne, his kingdom, and his occupation 
of judging to mere figures of speech. 

As I have already shown, these thrones, these 
kingdoms, these dignified occupations, etc., were 



139 

promised by Jesus to his most faithful followers, not 
only as rewards of merit, but also as remuneration 
for real time spent in his service, and in return for 
real property — houses, fishing tackle, etc., abandoned 
by his order. For these real services, these various 
kinds of real property, the followers of Jesus desired, 
and justly expected, something equally real in return, 
and when they asked what this was to be, Jesus, in 
the language which I have quoted, declared that to 
his chosen twelve it was to be a throne and a king- 
dom to each, and the dignified occupation of judging 
one of the twelve tribes of Israel. To his other fol- 
lowers he made this general promise : " And every- 
one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or 
sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or 
lands, for my name's sake, shall receive a hundred- 
fold, and shall inherit eternal life." 

And now, let me ask, in what do these thrones, 
these kingdoms, this hundredfold, etc., promised in 
return for real property, consist ? They certainly 
cannot consist merely in eternal life, since this, as 
you see, is distinctly promised in addition to all of 
them. Of necessity, therefore, they must consist in 
something that forms no part of eternal life. What, 
then, could they have been? You will doubtless 
admit that Jesus made, at least, a respectable use of 
language. If you be a grammarian, you will also 
admit that no respectable speaker or writer ever 
intermixes real objects and figurative objects in the 
same sentence, and in the same connection ; that no 
one ever puts real wine into figurative bottles, or fig- 
urative wine into real bottles. So of the things in 
question. You must admit that Jesus could not 



140 SPIBITUALISM A NECESSITY 

make real men sit upon figurative thrones, nor have 
real people judged by figurative judges. If, then, 
the apostles were real men, and the twelve tribes of 
Israel were real people, then the thrones, the king- 
doms, etc., mentioned in the same sentence, and in 
the same connection, are bound to be equally real 
objects. So of the hundredfold promised in return 
for the lands, the houses, etc., abandoned for the ser- 
vice of Jesus. If the onefold abandoned was real, 
the hundredfold promised are bound to be equally 
real. The nature of a quantity is never changed by 
multiplication. Every mathematician knows that 
the product is always composed of the same kind of 
units as is the multiplicand. When Jesus, therefore, 
for a multiplicand, takes a certain concrete quantity, 
composed of houses, lands, etc., and multiplies it by 
one hundred, what does he obtain for a product ? 
"What could he obtain but a hundred times as many 
houses, a hundred times as much land, etc., as were 
represented in the multiplicand ? Could he in this 
operation, by any possibility, obtain for a product a 
figurative or imaginary quantity ? 

To give the language in question any other than a 
literal meaning is simply to change it into disgusting 
nonsense. To give it any other meaning would also 
be to make Jesus an unmitigated scoundrel, since it 
would make him, by a wilful abuse of language, 
deceive his trusting and faithful followers, and thus 
evade the payment of any portion " of that which he 
solemnly promised them, when they entered his ser- 
vice, and to which they were so justly entitled. 

Suppose that a wealthy and powerful earthly 
monarch, about to engage in a great war, should by 



in god's general government. 141 

solemn proclamation promise that to each one of his 
subjects who would enlist in his army, and serve 
faithfully until honorably discharged, he would pay 
a liberal sum each month as wages, and would, in 
addition to this, at the close of the war, pay each 
soldier a specified sum of money as bounty, and give 
him a specified amount of land ; and would, in addi- 
tion to all these things, pay full value for all the 
property which anyone might have to abandon in 
order to enter his service. Suppose, further, that, 
loving their monarch, and trusting implicitly in his 
promises, thousands of his subjects should leave 
their all, as did Peter and others in the case of Jesus, 
and should rally to his standard, and through count- 
less toils, dangers, and sufferings, should win for him 
the victory. Suppose still further that at the close 
of the war this monarch should have in his treasury 
untold sums of money, which he could himself never 
use, and within his domains millions of square miles 
of vacant lands, which he could himself never occupy. 
Suppose, finally, that when his war-worn veterans 
returned he should refuse to pay them anything at 
all ; and, to excuse his damnable perfidy, should 
coolly inform them that the money and the lands 
which he had promised them were figurative money 
and figurative lands. "What would you think of such 
a monarch ? And yet, do you not by your blas- 
phemous teachings represent Jesus as acting in this 
unspeakably odious manner ? 

Besides all this, your teachings make eternal life a 
mere figure of speech, and not a reality. It is men- 
tioned as one of the items in the list of things 
promised by Jesus on this occasion. It and the 



142 SPIBITUALISM A NECESSITY 

other items are all promised in answer to the same 
question, and in exactly the same sense. If, there- 
fore, the thrones, the kingdoms, etc., mentioned at 
the same time, and in the same connection, be merely 
figurative objects, never to be possessed in. reality, 
the same is bound to be equally true of eternal life. 
The objects promised by Jesus on this occasion are 
all equally real in themselves, and, being all men- 
tioned in the same connection, and in the same sense, 
they must, of necessity, as mentioned here, be all 
equally real, or all equally unreal. You have no 
right, therefore, to go through the list as you have 
gone, and select certain items, according as they suit 
you, to be real, and certain others to be figurative. 
You must accept the entire list as real, or reject it as 
unreal. "What would Peter and the other disciples 
have thought if, in answer to their question as to 
what they should have for all they had forsaken to 
follow him, Jesus had replied that in reality they 
were to have nothing at all, but that figuratively they 
were to have thrones, kingdoms, etc., and were to be 
engaged in the dignified occupation of " judging the 
twelve tribes of Israel?" So of the lands, the houses, 
eternal life, etc. ; if they were all merely figurative 
rewards, never to be possessed in reality, what ad- 
vantage could they have ever been to those to whom 
they were promised, and what would those parties 
have thought if, when making this promise, Jesus 
had informed them that he was speaking figuratively, 
and that in realily he would never give them any- 
thing at all ? 

According to your teachings, the throne, the king- 
dom, and the occupation of Jesus become like those 



in god's general government. 143 

of the apostles, merely figurative objects which have 
no real existence. He positively declares : "And I 
appoint unto you a kingdom, as my father hath ap- 
pointed unto me." In order that his appointment 
unto them might be made as was his father's appoint- 
ment unto him, it was absolutely necessary, as every 
grammarian knows, that the two appointments should 
be made in exactly the same manner, and in exactly 
the same sense. By substituting these two phrases, 
therefore, for the word as in the text, we have the 
exact meaning fully and clearly expressed. "And I 
appoint unto you a kingdom, in the same manner 
and in the same sense that my father hath appointed 
unto me." These same remarks apply also with 
equal force to the occupation of judging which was 
to accompany these several kingdoms. In the same 
manner and in the same sense in which the father hath 
committed all judgment unto the son, the latter, in 
turn, hath recommitted a portion of it to the apostles 
and others whom, as we have already seen, he hath 
associated with himself in the grand work of carrying 
on his universal government. If, then, all those 
things which he hath committed to these persons be 
unreal, so, of necessity, must all those be which his 
father hath appointed unto himself. These appoint- 
ments all rest on exactly the same authority, and are 
spoken of in exactly the same sense. Of necessity, 
then, they must all be equally real, or all equally 
unreal. If they be all real, then is Spiritualism 
bound to be real, too, and to be an absolute necessity 
in the conducting of the government of God. If, 
however, they be all unreal, then, of necessity, relig- 
ion is bound to be a mere farce, heaven a mere 



144 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

fiction, the church a monstrous swindle, and your- 
selves the most unscrupulous of impostors. You 
cannot deny the justness of my conclusions, and now 
you may choose which horn of this dilemma you 
will take. Choose which you may, your cause is 
irretrievably lost. 

In the sixteenth chapter of Luke we have quite a 
spicy dialogue carried on between the patriarch 
Abraham and the rich man, whom I have already 
mentioned as being in hell. From this dialogue, and 
from what precedes it, we obtain much valuable in- 
formation bearing upon our subject. From the fact 
that Lazarus was borne by angels to Abraham's 
bosom, we learn that the spirits of the right- 
eous are not conveyed to the place of their future 
abode by the direct power of God, but by finite 
beings to whom this work is assigned. As I fully 
proved in my first lecture, many, if not all, of the 
angels of heaven are human spirits. In that same 
lecture I also proved that, whether they be angels 
themselves or not, " the spirits of just men made per- 
fect " "are as the angels which are in heaven," and 
"equal unto them." In order that they may thus be 
" as the angels which are in heaven," and " equal 
unto " them, it is absolutely necessary that these 
spirits be surrounded by the same conditions, engaged 
in the same occupations, and possessed of the same 
degree of power as are the angels. "Whatever, then, 
may be the conditions, the occupations, and the 
powers of angels, the same are bound to be the con- 
ditions, the occupations, and the powers of "the 
spirits of just men made perfect." In the case before 
us, therefore, we have positive evidence, not only 



in god's geneeal goveenment. 145 

that human spirits have work assigned them, but 
also that upon errands, such as the bearing away of 
new-born spirits, they pass freely backward and for- 
ward between earth and heaven. And all this proves 
conclusively, not only the truth, but also the heaven- 
approved, the heaven-necessary, character of Spirit- 
ualism. 

From the fact that the rich man in hell and Abra- 
ham in heaven were distinctly visible to each other, 
and from the fact that they carried on with each 
other a direct conversation, we learn that their 
respective places of abode cannot be very far apart. 
If, then, as you teach, heaven is up, in what direc- 
tion is hell, how far are the two places apart, and how 
far are they both from where we now are ? 

From the fact that, instead of praying directly to 
God, the rich man prayed to a human spirit, we learn 
that, in the opinion of the petitioner at least, this 
was the surest method of obtaining relief. You may 
object that the unfortunate circumstance of his being 
in hell so injured this damned man's reputation as to 
render his opinions and his testimony comparatively 
worthless. This, however, does not by any means 
follow. On the contrary, the fact of his being in hell 
gives additional weight both to his opinions and his 
testimony. We all admit that God never makes a 
fool and then damns him. The fact, then, that this 
man had been damned effectually establishes his 
intelligence — a very important qualification in a 
witness. Besides this, since we cannot doubt the 
sincerity of one who, from out the midst of flames, 
cries for water or for other relief, we are bound to 
admit that the unfortunate circumstance of his being 



146 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

in hell effectually establishes this man's sincerity — 
the most important of all the qualifications of a wit- 
ness. Situated as he was, he would certainly appeal 
to what he sincerely believed to be the proper 
authority. If hell-fire cannot make a man earnest 
and sincere in his prayers, what can ? The testimony 
before us, then, is that of an intelligent and sincere 
man ; of a man, too, who belonged to the wealthy 
class of citizens, to the higher circles of society, and 
to the orthodox church. And would not the testi- 
mony of such a man be received as first-class evidence 
in any court ? 

Be all this as it may, however, the human spirit 
Abraham, to whom the prayer in question was offered, 
and whose testimony cannot be disputed, certainly 
heard that prayer and replied to it. In doing this 
Abraham not only established the fact that human 
spirits can and do hear and answer prayers, but also 
the fact that it is perfectly right and proper for them 
to do so. Those of you act wisely, then, who call 
upon their spirit friends, who invoke the aid of the 
saints and the angels in heaven. And you who 
neglect to do this will some clay, when it is forever 
too late, regret your folly in failing to secure the 
assistance of some one who has a little more influence 
at heaven's headquarters than you have yourselves. 

It is true that in the case before us Abraham did 
not grant the relief prayed lor by his petitioner. 
His refusal to do so, however, was based, not on the 
ground that himself was not a proper person to hear 
and to answer prayers, but simply on the ground 
that this damned man was not a proper person to 
receive the relief for which he prayed. 



in god's general government. 147 

"When implored to send Lazarus to earth to warn 
this unhappy man's brethren, Abraham again refused 
on other grounds, but did not so much as intimate 
that he had no power to grant such prayers, nor that 
human spirits like Lazarus were unable to return to 
earth, and to communicate with men. Had it been 
either impossible or improper for him to send spirits 
to communicate with men, he would doubtless have 
mentioned this fact as the best of all reasons for not 
granting the petitioner's prayer. Instead of assign- 
ing any such reasons, however, he speaks of the 
sending of Lazarus to earth as of something which 
he could do, and which, on a proper occasion, he 
would do. 

Besides all this, Jesus, who tells the story, cer- 
tainly means to represent this damned man as pro- 
ceeding in the only proper manner to obtain that 
which he desired. He was using this man's ease to 
illustrate the utterly hopeless condition of the in- 
mates of hell, and in order to make that condition 
appear thus utterly hopeless he had to represent 
this man as appealing in a proper manner to the 
proper authority, and as having his petition rejected 
by that authority. To have represented him as 
making a mistake in praying to Abraham would not 
have been to represent his case as hopeless at all ; 
since, by correcting that mistake, and appealing to 
the proper authority, he might still have obtained 
that for which he prayed. Before any case can be 
pronounced utterly hopeless it must be properly 
presented to the highest tribunal before which such 
cases can come, and must be properly tried and lost 
before that tribunal. If, then, the case of this 



148 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

damned man was utterly hopeless, as Jesus certainly 
means to teach that it was, then in this case we have 
positive proof, not only that Abraham was the proper 
authority to try the case, but also that there was no 
appeal from his decision. In this case, then, we 
have conclusive evidence, from the highest possible 
source, that some human spirits of a higher grade, 
like Abraham, are placed in high authority in heaven, 
and that they grant or reject petitions, send messages 
to earth by other spirits, etc. We also have equally 
conclusive evidence, from the same high source, that 
other spirits of a lower grade, like Lazarus, are 
placed under the authority of superior spirits, and 
that they have inferior duties assigned them, such as 
bearing messages to men, etc. While thus employed 
bearing messages, etc., these spirits would be angels, 
and in the Bible would, of course, "be so called. It 
was doubtless by a band of such angels that Lazarus 
was borne to Abraham's bosom. 

God is undeniably the source of all power, and of 
all judgment ; and yet he does not in person exercise 
this all-power, and this all-judgment. In Matt, xxviii, 
18, we read : " And Jesus came and spake unto 
them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven 
and in earth." In John v, 22, as I have already 
quoted, we also read : " For the father judge th no 
man, but hath committed all judgment unto the son." 
This all-power, this all-judgment, thus delegated to 
Jesus, included, of course, the power to re-delegate a 
portion, or even all, of this same power and this 
same judgment to certain other parties whom he 
might see fit to make his agents or representatives ; 
and this re-delegation of power and of judgment he 



in god's general government. 149 

proceeded at once to make. As soon as he had de- 
clared that all power was given to him " in heaven 
and in earth," he added : " Go ye, therefore, and 
teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : 
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I 
have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you alway, 
even unto the end of the world." 

In these his final instructions Jesus refers to all 
the commands which he had ever given to his 
apostles, and requires them to teach all nations to 
observe them all. Mark has him on this same occa- 
sion repeat some of the former commands to which 
he refers, and which were to heal the sick-, to speak 
with new tongues, to cast out devils, to raise the 
dead, and, in short, to do all the works which him- 
self had been wont to do, and even " greater works 
than these." He also promises to be with them in 
these works, " alway, even unto the end of the world." 

These things prove beyond all contradiction that 
Jesus did not address the apostles in their individual 
capacities. Of course, he could not have expected 
them, as individuals, to continue on earth, engaged 
in these works, "alway, even unto the end of the 
world." He could have addressed such language to 
them only in their official or representative capaci- 
ties. In this case he would, of course, include all 
their successors in office, and all others of whom the 
apostles stood as the representatives. 

Whatever commands, then, whatever powers, and 
whatever promises were given to the apostles, were 
through them given to "them that believe," of all 
nations, and of all ages. If, then, Jesus was not an 



150 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

impostor, all those commands are still binding upon 
his followers, all those powers still possessed, and 
all those works still performed by them. If you 
deny all this, you simply make Jesus a liar, and over- 
turn the Christian religion. If you admit it all, you 
admit the truth and the heavenly character of Spir- 
itualism. You admit, too, that the Spiritualists, 
whom these signs follow, are of " them that believe," 
and of " them who shall be heirs of salvation." In 
either case you reduce, as usual, to mere pretend- 
ers — to those who are to be damned. 

You charge me with advocating a doctrine of the 
Catholic church. I admit the charge, and am glad 
that, in the Catholic church, I have so respectable 
an ally. I do not advocate anything, however, be- 
cause it is a doctrine of that or of any church. I 
advocate nothing but truth, and that I advocate 
simply because it is truth. If the Catholics happen 
to be in possession of a truth of which you are des- 
titute, so much the better for them, and so much the 
worse for you. I am not bound to reject a truth 
because they teach it, nor because you fail to teach 
it. If you would rather go to hell on a lie taught by 
your own church than to heaven on a truth taught 
by Catholics and Spiritualists, all right. Go your 
way. I have not the slightest objection. It is your 
privilege, and then there are not half so many go to 
hell as ought to go. I am not like most other min- 
isters of the gospel, trying to rob the devil of his 
just dues. Besides this, you will find hell full of just 
such men as yourselves — men who loved creeds more 
than they loved truth. With these persons you will 
be able to form more congenial associations than you 



in god's general government. 151 

could form anywhere else. All I have to say to you 
then, is — go to hell! 

While Jesus was on earth, acting in his human 
capacity, and as one under the authority of another, 
he dealt with men in person, just as a man deals 
with his fellow-men. When, however, his mortal 
part put on immortality, when he resumed his divine 
character, he ceased to deal with men in person, and 
began to deal with them exclusively through agents 
or representatives. Since his ascension into heaven 
he has not, so far as we know, performed in person 
a single act relating to men. As we have already 
seen, he has given to his agents on earth full power 
to do all those things which he was accustomed to 
do himself when he was upon earth, and all that he 
would now do himself if he were upon earth to-day. 
To his agents in heaven he has also given equally 
ample powers. He has made them kings and judges, 
and put them to work helping carry on his universal 
government. To every one, however humble, he has 
given something to do. 

In 1 Cor. vi, 2, 3, we read ; " Do ye not know that 
the saints shall -judge the world ? And if the world 
shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the 
smallest matters ? Know ye not that we shall judge 
angels ? How much more things that pertain to this 
life ? " In all the cases mentioned here the act of 
judging is spoken of in exactly the same sense. From 
this it is evident that the judging of angels and others 
in heaven is just as real as is the judging of " things 
that pertain to this life." Jhe saints in heaven, then, 
are real, not figurative, judges. 

In Luk§ ix, 49, 50, we read : " And John answered 



152 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in 
thy name, and we forbade him, because he followeth 
not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him 
not : for he that is not against us is for us." From 
this we learn that those who do the works of Jesus 
are approved of him, and are not to be forbidden, 
though they do not follow with his visible church. 
This is peculiarly applicable to that large and 
respectable class of Spiritualists who, like myself, 
outside of all church organizations, are faithfuHy 
laboring in the cause of truth and humanity. 

On the exclusive testimony of the Bible and of the 
Christian church I have now fully proved, not only 
that spiritual communications between men and 
spirits do take place, but also that a regular system 
of such communications is absolutely necessary to 
the fulfilling of the commands of Jesus, and to the 
conducting of God's general government. I will now 
briefly recapitulate my arguments, and then close. 

1. I have proved that " there is joy in the presence 
of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth." 
This renders constant communications between earth 
and heaven absolutely necessary. Without such 
communications the inhabitants of heaven would not 
know when to rejoice, nor over what sinner to rejoice. 

2. I have proved that there are certain spirits 
in heaven, called elders, who minister before the 
throne of Jesus, and who present to him " the prayers 
of the saints." In proving this I have proved that 
Jesus does not hear the prayers of the saints directly, 
but receives them through the hands of the elders 
who minister around his throne. In order that they 
may themselves receive the prayers which they are 



in god's general government. 153 

to present to Jesus, it is absolutely necessary that 
these elders be in constant communication with those 
who are praying on earth. 

3. By the case of Lazarus I have proved that when 
they die they are borne to their places of future abode 
by spirits who, because acting as messengers, are called 
angels. This, again, renders constant communica- 
tions between the spirit world and our own abso- 
lutely necessary. Without such communications the 
spirit angels would not know just when and where to 
go after each new-born spirit on earth. From this 
case I also prove that, at the time of a death, if at 
no other time, there are spirits among us. At such 
a time there must of necessity be present, for a 
moment, at least, the spirit of the one who has just 
died, and the spirits that have come to bear him to 
his future home. 

4. I have proved that whatsoever the apostles 
should bind or loose upon earth was to be bound or 
loosed in heaven. This, again, renders absolutely 
necessary a constant intercourse between the inhab- 
itants of earth and those of heaven. Without such 
intercourse those who are to do the binding and the 
loosing in heaven would not know when a thing has 
been bound or loosed on earth, nor what that thing 
might be. 

5. I have proved that the followers of Jesus were 
to speak with new tongues, Or in languages unknown 
to themselves. In order that they may be able to do 
this it is absolutely necessary for some spirit that 
understands the unknown language to take posses- 
sion of their organs of speech, and through them 
communicate whatever may be necessary in that 



154 SPIRITUALISM A NECESSITY 

unknown language. Persons whose organs of speech 
are thus taken possession of and used by spirits be- 
come what we now call speaking mediums. Of these 
we have thousands to-day. 

6. I have proved that Jesus, acting in his human 
capacity, called up spirits and conversed with them, 
thus demonstrating both the practicability and the 
propriety of doing these things. I have also proved 
that he commanded and empowered his followers to 
do these same things. Persons who thus see spirits 
and converse with them are what we now call clair- 
voyant and clairaudient mediums. Of these we have 
many thousands to-day. 

7. I have proved that during all time, " even' unto 
the end of the world," the followers of Jesus were to 
cast out evil spirits. In order that they may be able 
to do this it is absolutely necessary that such spirits 
actually have possession of certain persons, and that 
those who are to cast them out have power to discern 
their presence, and to communicate to them the order 
to depart. All these things render Spiritualism an 
absolute necessity. These works are as truly per- 
formed at the present time as they ever were. 

8. I have proved that " alway, even unto the end of 
the world," the followers of Jesus were to "raise 
the dead," that is, to call back the spirits of the dead 
for any proper purpose whatever, whether that pur- 
pose be to have them reinhabit their forsaken tene- 
ments of clay, or merely to have them commune with 
us on other matters. All this, again, renders Spirit- 
ualism an absolute necessity, as well as an imperative 
duty. 

9. I have proved that if you have our spirit friends 



in god's general government. 155 

of choice cease to commune with us, you make them 
worse than the damned ; that if you have them 
cease through compulsion, you make God worse than 
the devil, and that if you do not have them cease at 
all, you have Spiritualism in its full and glorious 
operation. 



LECTUEE IV. 

SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

Having in my three preceding lectures professedly 
acted simply as an attorney for Spiritualism, having 
accepted as truth — whether I believed it to be so or 
not — whatever testimony my opponents adduced in 
favor of Spiritualism through their own witnesses, 
the Bible and the Christian church, a question might 
arise in some of your minds as to whether I am or 
am not myself a believer in Spiritualism. To this 
question I reply that I am now a believer in this 
beautiful philosophy. I am only a recent convert, 
however, and my conversion was not effected by any 
of the Biblical and the church testimony given in 
the preceding lectures. It was effected by means of 
overwhelming tests that compelled me to believe. A 
description of these tests I shall not give in this 
course of lectures. Were I to describe them, they 
would be no tests to you. They would be hearsay 
evidence, and this you do not want unless you get it 
from the Bible or the church. You want direct 
tests — tests addressed to your own senses. These 
you can obtain from any good test-medium. Should 
you, in seeking these tests, find a fraud among the 
mediums, you need not be either surprised or dis- 
couraged. I found many such frauds, and I expect 
still to find many more. Though you admit that 
there have been many false Christs, you still believe 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 157 

that there is one true Christ. Apply this same prin- 
ciple then to the mediums, and you will not err. A 
belief in Spiritualism renders me a better and a 
happier man ; and I have no doubt that it would 
have the same effect upon yourselves. 

Having, in preceding lectures, fully established the 
truth of all the claims of Spiritualism, I propose now 
to consider the philosophy or the modus operandi of 
Spiritual Mediumship. I do not hold that there is any- 
thing supernatural in what are known as Spiritual 
Manifestations. Tome they appear to be just as strictly 
in accordance with the laws of nature as are any of 
the other phenomena with which we are acquainted. 
Indeed, I do not know any such thing as the super- 
natural. Supply the necessary conditions, and com- 
munications between a man and a spirit become just 
as easy and just as natural as are those between one 
man and another. The presence of these necessary 
conditions constitutes what is called Spiritual Me- 
diumship. 

On account of their infrequency, certain phenom- 
ena strike us as very wonderful ; and when we are 
ignorant of their true causes, we are easily led to 
believe that those causes are supernatural. In for- 
mer times the occurrence of eclipses, the appearance 
of comets, etc., were almost universally regarded 
with superstitious dread, as supernatural phenom- 
ena indicating the wrath of the gods, and portending 
some dire calamity to the inhabitants of the earth. 

The extremely ignorant still regard these phenom- 
ena in very nearly the same light. In all cases, how- 
ever, the true causes of all these phenomena, when 
ascertained, have proved to be just as natural as are 



158 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

the causes of the most common phenomena with 
which we are acquainted. We never need a god to 
account for any phenomena of which we know the 
real causes. All gods stand as the representatives of 
causes which we do not understand. The more 
ignorant men are, therefore, the more they need gods, 
and the more firmly they believe in the existence of 
such beings. Infidelity, or unbelief in the existence 
of the gods, never prevails except among the educated 
and the intelligent. It is a fact too well known to 
require any proof that in all countries the most 
ignorant classes are the most zealous religionists, no 
matter what the religion may be. Enlighten the peo- 
ple, and you ruin the trade of the priests. Educated 
and intelligent men rarely, if ever, become zealous 
worshipers of any god, unless they see money, fame 
popularity, or something else equally real and equally 
earthly in the enterprise. 

For my own part, I need no gods, and conse- 
quently I have no belief in their existence. Like 
space, Nature is everywhere present, and a thing can 
no more be outside of Nature than it can be outside 
of space. This is true of all things, from the forma- 
tion of a dew-drop to that of the entire universe. 
All motions and all formations are equally the results 
of properties and forces eternally inherent in mat- 
ter. None of them are produced by the interposition 
of divine power. 

As we have traveled over but a small portion of 
space, so we have become acquainted with but a small 
portion of Nature and of her powers. To limit these 
powers then to the few phenomena with which we are 
acquainted, and to assume that all those phenomena 



SPIEITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 159 

are supernatural, whose causes lie beyond these lim- 
its, is just as absurd as it would be to limit the extent 
of space in like manner to the small portion which 
we have visited, and then to assume that all those 
objects are superspacial which lie beyond the narrow 
limits thus assigned. And yet men have committed 
this very absurdity. They have assigned limits to 
Nature, and then placed certain phenomena beyond 
those limits. As the result of this absurdity, they 
had to assume something in the place of nature to 
account for those . phenomena which, as they erro- 
neously thought, lay beyond the limits of nature. 
This assumption gave rise to all those imaginary 
beings called gods. "Were we to absurdly assign 
limits to space, then of necessity we would be com- 
pelled to assume something, in lieu of space, to con- 
tain those objects which, in our erroneous opinions, 
would lie beyond the limits of space. "Whatever we 
might call the thing thus assumed, it would be just 
as real as are any of the gods whose existence is a 
mere assumption, rendered necessary, as we have 
seen, by a precisely similar absurdity. 

Some men assumed only one god, and ascribed to 
him a diversity of powers sufficient to account for all 
those phenomena whose real causes were unknown. 
By far the greater number, however, assumed many 
gods, to each of whom they ascribed the production 
of a particular class of phenomena. Whether many 
or few, these gods were all equally the creatures of 
men's imaginations, and all equally had their origin 
in dark ages, and among ignorant and superstitious 
men. No god ever did, or ever could, take his rise in 
an enlightened age and among an intelligent people. 



160 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

All the gods, too, are equally useless. The phenom- 
ena which they are assumed to produce, having their 
real causes in nature, would be produced just the 
same without these assumed causes as with them. 
We might assume something, in lieu of space, to con- 
tain all those objects which lie beyond certain limits ; 
and yet, notwithstanding our assumption, those ob- 
jects would continue to lie in space just the same. 
The thing assumed, being entirely imaginary, would 
evidently be entirely useless. So of the equally 
imaginary gods. Neither nature nor space can possi- 
bly be absent from any place, and hence nothing can 
possibly be beyond either of them. In a former 
work, entitled, " Deity Analyzed," I more fully con- 
sidered these things, and more fully proved the truth 
of all that I now assert concerning them. I merely 
glance at them now in order that you may understand 
why it is that, in considering the various phases of 
mediumship, I leave all of the gods entirely out of 
the question, and appeal to nature alone. I shall no 
longer act as a mere attorne}^ of Spiritualism, and 
shall no longer accept as true any testimony which I 
do not believe to be true. I shall fearlessly attack 
the testimony of the Bible, of the church, or of any 
other party, if I believe that testimony to be false > 
and I shall fearlessly hold up for ridicule anything 
that I regard as ridiculous. 

In treating this subject, I shall have to take it for 
granted that you are all believers in what is usually 
termed " the immortality of the soul," and that conse- 
quently you are all believers also in the existence of 
that class of beings called spirits. For those who do 
not believe in these things, I can on the present 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 161 

occasion do but little. They need tests, and these I 
am not prepared to give. These will be given by 
any good test medium. 

Taking it for granted, then, that spirits do exist, it 
follows of necessity that they must exist somewhere ; 
and since, as we have already seen, nature, like space, 
exists everywhere ; it also follows of equal necessity 
that they must exist within the domain" of nature 
just as we do, and subject to her laws just as we are. 
In preceding lectures I fully proved, by testimony 
which no believer in the Christian religion will dare 
to reject, that spirits do exist, and do communicate 
with men. Taking these facts for granted, therefore, 
I shall proceed at once to the consideration of the 
means by which the communications in question are 
rendered practicable. 

Spiritual communications of all kinds may be 
reduced to the following five distinct classes — viz.: 

1. Those made by raps, and by other physical signs ; 

2. Those made by writing, through the hand of a 
medium ; 3. Those made by speaking, through the 
lips of a medium ; 4. Those made by clairvoyance 
and clairaudience ; 5. Those made by inspiration. 
These five methods of communication involve five 
different phases of mediumship, which I will now 
proceed to explain. 

The most common method by which spirits com- 
municate with men is by means of raps, or physical 
signals of some kind. This is a species of natural 
language, and is usually the only method by which 
spirits can communicate with men. Indeed, even 
this method is practicable only under certain con- 
ditions, which I will explain. 



162 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

Two living men may be so situated relatively to 
each other that in order to carry on any correspond- 
ence with each other they would be compelled to 
resort to this very method. Let A be a man who can 
hear and speak, but who is totally blind ; let B be 
another man who can see and hear, but who has no 
voice at all. Now, let B pay a visit to A. Since B 
cannot speak, and since A cannot see him approach, 
B, you perceive, is compelled to rap, or to make some 
other physical signal, addressed to A's sense of hear- 
ing, in order that his presence may be made known 
to A. Let us suppose, then, that B raps. "Who is 
there ?" asks B. No answer. And why not ? Be- 
cause, as you already know, B cannot speak, and 
because no number of raps would indicate his name. 
" Did not some one rap ?" asks A. Three raps an- 
swer, " Yes." " Who is it, then ?" No response. 
"Can you not speak?" Two raps answer, "No." 
You now perceive that B can do nothing except answer 
" Yes " or " No " to direct questions. A, however, 
fails to ask such questions as would enable B to thus 
make known the object of his visit. A then asks : 
" Could you spell out the object of your visit by rap- 
ping at the proper letters, if I were to slowly repeat 
the alphabeb?" Three raps answer, "Yes." A now 
proceeds to repeat the alphabet aloud, and whenever 
he reaches the proper letter of a word, one rap is heard. 
Thus slowly, but surely, A learns the object of B's 
visit. And now, let me ask, could A, without the aid 
of a third party, have gained this information in any 
other way ? Suppose we blindfold some man in the 
audience, and then let one of you from the opposite 
side of the hall, without using your voice, undertake 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 163 

to communicate to him some particular message, how 
would you do this, except by raps, or by some simi- 
lar physical signals ? 

In these supposed cases we have placed the parties 
communicating in precisely the same situation, rela- 
tively to each other, as that in which a man and a 
spirit are placed when undertaking to carry out with 
each other a similar correspondence. Men whose 
spiritual eyes are not opened are totally blind to all 
spiritual objects, while spirits are totally voiceless to 
men whose spiritual ears are not opened. The con- 
sciousness of such men can be reached only through 
their physical senses. Hence the necessity, in com- 
municating directly with such men, of the raps, or 
other physical effects, produced by the spirits upon 
tables or other material objects. By agreement be- 
tween the parties communicating, certain forms, 
numbers, and combinations of these raps, motions, 
etc., are fixed upon as definite signs, by means of 
which communications are made. This method of 
communicating with spirits was known and used 
among the Romans and the early Christians. And 
now, having shown that it is a natural and neces- 
sary method, and not at all trivial, I will proceed to 
explain the means by which spirits are enabled to 
produce the raps and other physical phenomena in- 
volved in this method. 

Most of you are doubtless aware that all men pos- 
sess certain magnetic powers which constitute them 
weak magnets. Many of you, however, may not be 
aware that these magnetic powers inhere principally 
in the spirits of men, and not in their bodies, and 
yet such has been found to be undeniably the fact. 



164 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

After the departure of the spirit, the body of a man 
possesses very little, if any, of this power. The 
power, then, evidently accompanies the spirit. In- 
deed, it is now known that all volition, all thought, 
all sensation, and all consciousness depend upon the 
power of magnetism. In order to have any conscious 
existence at all, then, spirits must of necessity pos- 
sess magnetism. 

Though all men are really positive in their mag- 
netic conditions, some of them are negative as com- 
pared with others. This fact accounts for the well- 
known attractions and repulsions that exist among 
men, and especially between persons of opposite sex. 
By a well-known law of magnetism, two persons who 
are alike in their magnetic conditions will repel, 
while two others, who are unlike in this respect, will 
attract each other. If those who repel each other 
be thrown much together, a strong dislike, amount- 
ing sometimes to intense hatred, is apt to spring up 
between them. Between those who attract each 
other, a strong friendship is apt to spring up. In- 
deed, other conditions being all right, a man very 
positive in his magnetic condition, and a woman 
very negative in hers, w r hen thrown much together, 
will inevitably fall deeply in love with each other. 
They become restless and unhappy when deprived 
of each other's society. "When they press each 
other's hands — and this they are sure to do — a thrill 
of pleasure pervades their whole beings, and when 
their lips happen to meet — as they sometimes do — 
their bliss becomes absolutely indescribable. 

In this latter case, the unlike magnetisms of the 
two parties are striving to flow together, and to thus 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 165 

establish an equilibrium. And it is now a well- 
known fact that these unlike magnetisms do flow 
together even through considerable distances, and 
through intervening obstacles. If the current of 
magnetism flowing between two such persons be 
made to pass through a liquid which holds certain 
substances in solution, a very obvious chemical ac- 
tion may be made to take place among the substances 
thus held in solution. This proves the power of the 
magnetic current. This same power, however, is 
often proved in another way. If the one you most 
dearly love be in great danger, or great trouble, you 
generally have an intuition of the fact, more or less 
vivid, even though you be many miles away. 

If between two persons, such as I have been de- 
scribing, a metallic substance be made to intervene, 
the magnetic currents will pass through it so freely 
that no raps or other sensible effects are likely 
to be produced. If the intervening substance be 
glass, the magnetic currents will not pass at all ; and 
hence, in this case, as in the other, no sensible effects 
are likely to be produced. If, however, the inter- 
vening substance be wood, the magnetic currents will 
pass through it ; but, being partially obstructed in 
their passage, they will be likely to produce certain 
percussive sounds which we call raps. These sounds 
proceed from an exceedingly feeble action of a cer- 
tain form of that mighty force which sometimes in 
an instant shivers the giant oak into a thousand frag- 
ments, and shakes the solid earth with its terrific 
thunderings. 

In order to produce raps, table-tippings, etc., by 
means of human magnetism, a circular table, well- 



166 SPIKITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

joined, and free from varnish, should be provided. 
Around this table a circle of from six to twelve per- 
sons should be formed. In this circle the two sexes 
should be equally represented. In their magnetic 
conditions the men should be as unlike the women 
as possible, and they should be seated alternately — 
that is, first a man, then a woman, then a man, and 
so on. To some extent the magnetic conditions of 
persons may be determined by their temperaments. 
An efficient circle may usually be formed of a certain 
number of men with black hair, black eyes, and dark 
complexion, and an equal number of women with 
light hair, blue eyes, and fair complexion. Perfect 
harmony must prevail among the members of the 
circle. All should be willing to give the experiment 
a fair trial. Anyone may prevent success by de- 
stroying the conditions upon which success depends. 

Having in this manner formed the circle, let the 
members join hands upon the table, and then fix 
their thoughts intently upon its center, and listen for 
the raps which they desire to hear there. Such a 
circle is not likely to sit long without raps. If a 
good medium be present, raps will be heard almost 
immediately. 

When the raps have become so fully established 
that questions are answered promptly, then let the 
unbroken circle of hands be raised an inch or more 
from the table, and moved backward and forward 
over the table, about as fast as the table would oscil- 
late if once set in motion. If the legs of the table 
be close together, as they should be for this experi- 
ment, the table will soon begin to oscillate in unison 
with the circle of hands. Let these oscillations be 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 167 

noticed, and as they increase, let the movement of 
the circle of hands be gradually changed from a 
horizontal to a kind of rocking motion, so as to favor 
these oscillations. Let these movements be con- 
tinued until the table tips beyond its centre of 
gravity, and falls upon the floor. 

If you can ever start the table to moving at all, 
you can always overturn it, since the moment it be- 
gins to oscillate both gravity and inertia come to 
your aid, and enable you to increase that motion. 
The currents of magnetism which pass from the cir- 
cle of hands to the table may be compared to an 
infinite number of highly elastic but invisible threads 
which pull the table in whatever direction the circle 
of hands is being moved. 

I am now prepared to hear it objected that I 
have disproved the truth of this phase of Spiritual- 
ism by showing that genuine raps, table-tippings, etc., 
may be produced, without the aid of spirits, by 
human magnetism alone. Very well. I fully under- 
derstand the difficulty into which I seem to have 
fallen, and I have purposely encountered it. If the 
difficulty exist only in appearance, I will remove it ; 
if it- exist in reality, then let this phase of medium- 
ship be condemned. If, in all its phases, Spiritual- 
ism cannot bear the tests of reason, of science, and 
of common sense, then it ought to go down, just as 
all religions, founded on the idea of a personal god, 
are bound to go, whenever they are subjected to these 
same tests. 

My explanation, however, does not at all tend to 
disprove the truth of this phase of Spiritualism. 
It merely shows how careful we ought to be in our 



1G8 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

investigations, lest we indiscriminately ascribe to 
spiritual agency phenomena, some of which may 
perchance be produced by the agency of men ; and 
lest, on the other hand, we, in like manner, ascribe 
to human agency phenomena, some of which, per- 
chance, may be produced by the agency of spirits. 

As the fact that swans can fly is no proof at all 
that eagles cannot do the same, so the fact that men 
can produce certain phenomena is no proof at all 
that spirits cannot produce the same. Your objec- 
tion, then, is entirely without foundation. Indeed, 
my explanation is a strong argument in favor of the 
truth of Spiritualism. Men are simply spirits en- 
cased in coverings of flesh, and spirits are simply 
men minus these fleshly coverings. Unless, then, 
you can prove that the phenomena in question are 
produced by the fleshly coverings of the spirits 
that surround the table, you are bound to admit 
that they are produced by the spirits themselves. 
Such proof, however, you can never give. The dead 
bodies of men are found to possess none of the mag- 
netic power upon which these phenomena depend. 
Not even one rap can be produced by the dead bodies 
of a dozen mediums. Not so, however, with dis- 
embodied spirits. To say nothing of the thousands 
of careful tests made yearly by many of the most 
honest and intelligent men of the present time, all 
history, both sacred and profane, is filled with ac- 
counts of the achievements of disembodied spirits. 
The opposers of Spiritualism may, and actually do, 
produce genuine raps, table tippings, etc., but when 
they pretend that, by so doing, they disprove the 
truth of Spiritualism, they simply expose either their 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 169 

own gross ignorance, or their own lamentable want 
of common honesty. Let them leave their own spir- 
its and all other spirits entirely out of the experi- 
ment — let them surround the table with their fleshly 
bodies alone ; and then, and not till then, can they 
justly claim that, by the production of the phe- 
nomena in question, they have succeeded in casting 
even a doubt upon the truth of Spiritualism. Even 
this test would amount to no proof damaging to 
Spiritualism, for although fleshly bodies might pro- 
duce these phenomena, spirits might still produce 
the same. 

For the sake of the argument, however, let us, for 
a moment, admit that, in proving the power of men 
to produce certain phenomena, you have proved the 
inability of spirits to produce the same. In other 
words, let us admit, as proved by you, that there is 
no power common to both men and spirits. Then, 
indeed, according to your wish, we prove that be- 
cause men can produce raps, table tippings, etc., 
spirits cannot produce any of these phenomena. But 
we do not stop here. "We also prove that because 
men can see, hear, speak, move, taste, smell, feel, 
think, etc., spirits can not do any of these things. 
In other words, as you plainly see, we prove spirits 
i entirely out of conscious existence. So much, then, 
for this vaunted proof of the self-styled exposers 
of Spiritualism. They prove either too much or too 
little. 

Since the second and the third phases of medium- 
ship, writing and speaking under spirit control, both 
depend upon precisely the same principles, I will 
treat them together. Like the first phase, these two 



170 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

phases depend, for their operation, upon tiie power 
of magnetism. 

Although our knowledge of magnetism is confined 
entirely in its effects, yet we are as sure of its exist- 
ence as we are of that of heat, of light, of air, or of 
anything else. With many of the laws of magnetism 
we are also acquainted. We know that its power 
decreases inversely as the square of the distance 
from the magnet or body which contains it. We 
know, too, that one magnet will suspend, invert, or 
in some other way control the action of another mag- 
net of less power than its own. For illustration, let 
us take a small magnet whose power, within a certain 
sphere of which itself is the center, we will say is 
one. Let this magnet be placed in contact with an- 
other magnet whose power is five. It is evident that 
the entire sphere pervaded by the power of the 
smaller magnet is now pervaded also by the five-fold 
greater power of the larger magnet. It is also 
evident that whatever objects lie within the sphere 
of the smaller magnet, and which, were no greater 
power present, would obey the power of that mag- 
net, must now disregard this weaker power, and obey 
the much greater power of the larger magnet. By a 
greater power than its own, the smaller magnet is 
mesmerized, so to speak, or thrown into a magnetic 
sleep. For the time it has lost its individuality, and 
has become, as it were, a part of the larger magnet. 

Now, let us suppose that these two magnets are 
two persons, of whom A is the weaker and B the 
stronger. On being brought together, A is imme- 
diately mesmerized or thrown into a magnetic sleep 
by the greater power of B. For the time, A's indi- 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 171 

viduality is lost, and his hands, his organs of speech, 
etc., being now under the influence of a stronger 
power than his own, are bound to obey that stronger 
power, and to write, to speak, etc., as ordered by that 
controlling power. That one person can sometimes 
thus bring another under his control is now a well- 
established fact. I therefore offer no proofs. 

Thus far we have regarded both A and B as living 
persons. Let us now, however, take B's body from 
him, and let him, as a spirit,, with his powerful mag- 
netism undiminished, again pervade A's magnetic 
sphere. Again brought under his control, A again 
writes and speaks according to his will. A is now a 
writing and speaking medium, such as have existed 
in all ages of the world. 

Having fully explained the three lower phases of 
mediumship, in which the medium is a mere instru- 
ment, I will now proceed to the consideration of 
those higher phases, clairvoyance, clairaudience, and 
inspiration, in which the medium becomes the -com- 
panion and the equal of spirits. 

If spirits exist at all, as sentient and intelligent 
beings, it is evident that they must of necessity 
possess all the senses and faculties, such as sight, 
hearing, feeling, thinking, etc., which are necessary 
to constitute them such beings. To make them 
blind, deaf, dumb, motionless, and devoid of thought 
and of feeling, would be simply to deny their exist- 
ence. Since, then, we have taken it for granted that 
they do exist, we are bound also to take it for grant- 
ed that they do possess sight, hearing, and all the 
other senses and faculties essential to such existence. 
All this being taken for granted, it is evident that if 



172 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

the spirit itself exists before the death of the body 
it must exist with all the essential senses and facul- 
ties of such existence. To have all these senses and 
faculties created after death, would leave nothing to 
go forth out of the body at the time of death. Such 
a creation, therefore, would not be a continuation of 
man's existence at all. It would be simply the an- 
nihilation of man, and the creation of an entirely 
new race of beings. 

From this it is evident that in the present life all 
men are dualistic beings, having one full set of physi- 
cal organs, physical senses, etc., adapted to bring 
them into relation with the material world ; and an- 
other set of spiritual organs, spiritual senses, etc., 
adapted to bring them into relation with the spiritual 
world. St. Paul very clearly teaches this truth in 
his outer man and his inner man, in his natural 
body and his spiritual body. Indeed, no one who 
believes in the immortality of the soul can deny this 
truth. It is true, however, that having to deal mostly 
with the material world, our spiritual faculties in 
the present life are rarely called into action. The 
consequence is that for want of use during the pres- 
ent state of existence our spirital faculties are usually 
allowed to lie in a dormant or undeveloped condition. 
Indeed, like the rudimentary wings of the butterfly 
in its chrysalis state this undeveloped or rudiment- 
ary condition of our spiritual faculties during the 
present life is undoubtedly their normal condition, 
and should be allowed to continue until Nature, in 
her own time and manner, brings about a develop- 
ment. The forced development of our spiritual 
faculties during the present life is as unnatural as 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 173 

would be the forced development of the wings of a 
butterfly in its chrysalis state. This forced and un- 
natural development then, whether it be produced by 
spiritual developing circles, or by religious revival 
meetings, should be emphatically discouraged. "What 
we want in this material world is physical develop- 
ment. We want bodies which are the perfection of 
physical health, strength, and beauty. From such 
bodies, and from such alone, will Nature, in her own 
good time, bring forth forms which shall be the per- 
fection of spiritual health, strength, and beauty. 
From a chrysalis, which is rotting with disease, and 
which changes before the natural time, Nature cannot 
produce a butterfly perfect in health, strength, and 
beauty. So from a man who is a bundle of diseases 
and deformities, and who changes before the natural 
time, Nature cannot produce a spirit perfect in 
health, strength, and beauty. 

If our ministers of the gospel would properly 
consider this matter, and would turn their attention 
to the production of perfectly developed, strong, 
healthy, and beautiful bodies for the people, then 
their labors would result in real good. To people 
thus physically perfect, this life would be a real 
blessing ; this world a land of flowers, of sunlight, 
and of joy. In their great eagerness, however, to 
gain converts and dollars, our ministers of the gos- 
pel, as a class, are now doing positive harm. They 
are turning away the attention of the people from a 
real good that might be attained, and directing it to 
an imaginary good that can not be attained. To a 
great extent their congregations are made up of per- 
sons whose first births have been sadly mismanaged, 



174 SPIEITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

whose physical conditions have been extremely un- 
favorable, and whose bodies in consequence are so 
badly put together, so shaky, so full of aches and of 
pains, that were they not held together by artificial 
means they would be liable at any moment to fall to 
pieces. To the unhappy dwellers in these wretched 
tenements this life is not a blessing, this world is not 
a land of flowers, of sunlight, and of joy. To them 
it is just what in their unutterably sad wailings they 
represent it to be — " a vale of tears, a wilderness of 
woe." And yet because it is unpopular to do so, 
and because it does not pay, our ministers of the 
gospel make no effort to remove the causes of all this 
misery. They make no effort to secure perfect first 
births, perfect physical conditions, to future genera- 
tions. Because it is popular to do so, and because 
it pays, they constantly harp upon the second birth, 
and the blissful conditions of the spirit world. This 
is wrong. These ministers ought to know and ought 
to teach that from the moment of conception, and 
even before, to the utmost limit of spirit-life, man is 
under the control of Nature's laws. They ought to 
know and ought to teach that any violation of these 
laws is inevitably attended with suffering. They 
ought to know and ought to teach that Nature has 
divided human existence into three grand periods : 
The present life ; the antenatal life which precedes 
the present ; and the spiritual life which follows it ; 
that each succeeding period is an almost infinite 
advance upon the preceding, but that any untimely 
passage from a lower to a higher period is a great if 
not an irreparable misfortune; that to undergo the 
second birth — the change called death, the birth 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 175 

from this life into the life of spirits, before the natu- 
ral time — seventy years or more — is just as much an 
abortion, and just as much a misfortune to the sub- 
ject of it, as is a similarly untimely birth into this 
life. 

I do not wish to bring a pang into the hearts of 
those parents who have been wont to solace their 
grief for the loss of their children with the thought 
that by an untimely, and consequently an unnatural 
death, those children have been rendered better off. 
I wish I could truthfully say that I believe such to 
be the fact. As a conscientious man, however, I must 
say that until all its uses are attained — until as fully 
ripe fruit we pass from it — this life is by far the best 
life there is for us. Those suffer a great disadvan- 
tage who make an abortive or untimely entrance into 
spirit-life. Were this not true — were it a fact that 
by death children are rendered better off — then, 
since it is always our duty to better the condition 
of our children, it would undeniably be our duty to 
hurry them out of this life into a better one. Com- 
forting as is the doctrine, however, that untimely 
death renders our children better off, few sane per- 
sons really believe it. "Insane persons have really 
believed it, and have actually slain their children to 
render them better off. From all these things it is 
evident that in this life our principal concern should 
be the first birth, the perfect development of the 
body, the physical conditions generally. I have 
made this rather lengthy digression because of the 
evil that is being done, not only by the teachings of 
ministers of the gospel, but also by those of many 
Spiritualistic leaders, who, with wasted bodies all 



176 SPIEITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

trembling from nervous prostration and agony, are 
running wild after spiritual power and spiritual de- 
velopment, which they do not yet need, and totally 
neglecting to seek the physical power and the phys- 
ical development which they do so greatly need. 
Give me the perfectly developed bodies — all health, 
strength, and beauty — to which suffering is unknown, 
and I will guarantee that Nature, in her own good 
time and manner, will make the spirits all right. If 
you can only get a good first birth, you need not 
trouble yourself about the second birth. That will 
be all right. 

When, however, the uses of this state of existence 
have all been accomplished, when the weights of life 
have run down, and its pendulum has ceased to 
vibrate ; when nature's own full time has come for 
this mortal to put on immortality, then the spiritual 
faculties come as naturally into action as do the 
lungs upon our first entrance into the present life. 
Sometimes, also, without actually suffering death, a 
man may enter into an abnormal condition, called 
trance, which so nearly resembles death that, for the 
time, his physical faculties are almost as fully sus- 
pended as they would be in death itself. While in 
this condition the same necessities which death pro- 
duces are upon him, and, of course, the same 
immediate results follow. His spiritual faculties are 
aroused to action, and he sees spirits and converses 
with them just as spirits see and converse with one 
another. He is now, indeed, in the spirit-world, but 
only as a transient visitor. He must soon return to 
his physical condition. The power to thus see 
spirits, and to hear them speak, constitutes what we 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 177 

call clairvoyance and clairaudience. Some persons 
have power to enter into this trance condition, and 
to become clairvoyant and clairaudient at pleasure. 
A few use their spiritual faculties without going into 
any trance at all. These latter persons, simultane- 
ously using both their physical and their spiritual 
faculties, are, of course, at the same time, in direct 
communication with both worlds. This condition is 
a very desirable one, provided it come naturally, 
and without injury to the physical powers. It should 
never be attained, however, by any forcing process. 

Clairvoyance and clairaudience may generally be 
induced by fasting until the body becomes extremely 
attenuated and the physical powers almost exhausted. 
This is especially the case, if, while fasting, the 
thoughts be kept fixed upon heavenly or spiritual 
things. Under the erroneous idea that it is a virtue 
to do so, the devotees of all religions, and of all ages, 
have been accustomed to induce this state by sub- 
jecting themselves to long-continued fastings, prayers, 
and meditations. By thus all using the same means 
they have all, naturally enough, attained the same 
end, no matter what religions they have professed, 
nor what gods they have worshiped. When greatly 
emaciated by long illness, most persons, just before 
death, are apt to become clairvoyant and clair- 
audient. They then behold the angelic forms and 
hear the heavenly music of their spirit friends, who 
are waiting to welcome them to their bright abodes 
amid the fadeless beauties of the summer-land. 

Under certain conditions clairvoyance and clair- 
audience may also be induced by human magnetism. 
Sometimes the magnetism is supplied by the " laying 



178 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

on of hands," or other manipulations of a special 
operator. When this operator is a priest, or a body 
of priests, and the subject is a candidate for holy 
orders, the operation is called imparting the holy 
ghost. It must be confessed, however, that this 
formal laying on of hands, under the pretense of im- 
parting the holy ghost, very rarely produces clair- 
voyance or any other sensible effect. 

The magnetism is more frequently supplied by a 
large number of persons, of both sexes, crowded 
together as closely as possible, and all highly wrought 
up on some subject, as is the case in what are called 
revival meetings. Surrounding such a crowd of per- 
sons, especially in an ill- ventilated room, there is a 
powerful magnetic sphere, near the center of which, 
if very susceptible persons be placed, they will 
become magnetized, and will finally, if the operation 
be continued, experience that peculiar sensation 
which is usually denominated " getting religion," or 
" conversion." When fully magnetized, such persons 
feel a " joy unspeakable and full of glory," and some- 
times, becoming clairvoyant and clairaudient, they see 
"heaven opened," as they express it, and behold 
things of indescribable beauty, and hear music of 
unutterable sweetness. 

In order to expedite the work of conversion, the 
candidates should be kept in the center of the greatest 
excitement, and the crowd around them should be 
packed as closely as possible. If practicable, this 
crowd should be composed entirely of believers. The 
presence of an infidel will tend to retard, if not to 
prevent, the success of the experiment. It is very 
difficult for a man to become converted in the back 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 179 

part of the church, on the outside of the crowd of 
people. This is especially the case if there be unbe- 
lievers and scoffers about him, and if he be near an 
open door or window, where the fresh air drives 
away the moist, magnetic atmosphere of the room, 
on which his conversion principally depends. 

During the progress of this experiment the leader 
of the meeting, or some other good magnetizer, 
should, as often as convenient, approach the candi- 
dates, clasp their hands, place his hands upon their 
heads, gently slap their backs, etc. In this way the 
advantages of special manipulation may be added to 
those of a dense and magnetic crowd. All good 
revivalists understand these things, and act accord- 
ingly. As to the bodily position of the candidates, 
I would recommend the old, Methodistic plan, which 
I have myself practiced with great success, of having 
them all kneel together at what is called a mourner's 
bench, or anxious seat. By this position we prevent 
their attention from being called off by what is going 
on around them, and thus we secure the conditions 
most favorable for their conversion. 

Besides all these things, the candidates, if possible, 
should be induced to observe a strict fast, from the 
moment they engage in the experiment, till their 
conversion is completed. By the pernicious habit of 
allowing them to eat heartily, during the recesses of 
the meetings, their conversion is always greatly 
retarded, and frequently entirely prevented. In 
Acts x, 9-11, we read: " Peter went up upon the house- 
top to pray, about the sixth hour : and he became 
very hungry, and would have eaten, but while they 
made ready he fell into a trance, and saw heaven 



180 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

opened," etc. Peter had doubtless been fasting a 
longtime. At any rate, "he became very hungry," 
just the right condition in which to become entranced, 
and to see "heaven opened." Had Peter not been 
fasting, it is not at all likely that he would have been 
thus entranced. To secure such entrancement it is 
generally necessary, by means of fasting or other 
methods of depletion, to % so reduce the physical 
powers that they almost cease to act. In this way 
the fleshly covering of the spirit is made to hang, as 
it were, so loosely, that the spirit attains almost the 
same degree of freedom that it would attain by the 
full dissolution of the body. To some extent this 
same physical condition of attenuation is also essen- 
tial to conversion. You can readily understand, 
therefore, that it would be almost an utter impossi- 
bility to convert a man whose stomach is crammed 
with undigested bacon, beans, cabbage, cucumbers, 
sausages, buttermilk, corn bread, etc., etc. If, then, 
the candidates eat at all, it should be very sparingly 
of rice, sweet milk, half-cooked eggs, and other sim- 
ilar articles, and during the entire experiment they 
should strictly abstain from the use of tobacco and 
intoxicating drinks. 

By strictly observing all these directions, you 
ought to be able to convert children and nervous 
women in about three days. Even the toughest old 
male sinners ought to succumb to this course of 
treatment within a week. In the good old days, 
when Methodists were accustomed to worship God 
with their hearts, when they were accustomed to put 
themselves under the proper magnetic conditions, 
their conversions were comparatively easy, and were 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 181 

frequently attended by the trance state, and by clair- 
voyance. Now, however, since Methodists, like other 
Christians, have come to worship God with their 
clothes, their conversions have become comparatively 
rare and difficult, and are very seldom attended by 
trance or by clairvoyance. 

You now understand how our spiritual faculties 
may be aroused to action. It is neither by any 
special merit in any particular religion, nor by the 
interposition of any particular god. In regard to 
this matter all religions and all gods .are exactly 
alike. The shouting pagan, the shouting Brahman, 
the shouting dervish, and the shouting Christian, are 
all equally happy in the same magnetic condition, 
which each of them is pleased to call "heartfelt 
religion." In his ignorance, however, each of these 
parties imagines that his peculiarly joyful sensations 
are miraculously produced in him, as a token of love 
and of approbation, by the direct interposition of his 
particular god, whom he believes he has succeeded 
in pleasing, by means of his fastings, his prayers, his 
sacrifices, etc. Each one of these parties also igno- 
Tantly imagines that his is the only god whose 
followers are thus filled with " joy unspeakable and 
full of glory." Each one of them, therefore, very 
naturally, condemns as false all the gods, and all the 
religions, except their own. From this ignorance 
arises all the bigotry, all the intolerance, and all the 
religious persecutions, of the world. Let the truth 
only be known, and all this bigotry, this intolerance, 
etc., will cease. 

I bring the phenomenon called conversion into this 
discussion because that phenomenon is simply a 



182 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

magnetic condition which frequently precedes or 
accompanies clairvoyance, and which is induced by 
the same means as is the latter phenomenon. By 
whatever means produced, there is nothing mirac- 
ulous, nothing specially meritorious, in either con- 
version or clairvoyance. Neither the one nor the 
other is any proof of superior goodness on the part 
of the subject of it, and neither the one nor the other 
is any proof of the superior excellence of any partic- 
ular religion, or of the approbation of any particular 
god. As I have already shown, the gods have noth- 
ing at all to do with these phenomena, except as 
operators use them as objects upon which to fix the 
thoughts of the subject, and with which to thus 
arouse him to the proper magnetic condition. In 
order to succeed well, the operator in all cases should 
invoke the god in which the subject is a believer. 
If the prejudices of the subject be shocked, he will 
not go into the magnetic condition necessary to con- 
version and to clairvoyance. If, then, the subject be 
a Brahman, you should, of course, invoke Brahm ; if 
he be a^ Mussulman, you should invoke Allah, and 
should bring in the name of Mohammed ; if he be a' 
Christian, you should invoke Jehovah, and should 
bring in the name of Jesus. Remember these things, 
therefore, in your developing circles, and your revival 
meetings, and in all cases try to adapt your proceed- 
ings to the prejudices of those upon whom you are 
operating. 

The phenomena of conversion and clairvoyance 
are just as much the results of natural laws as are 
those of hunger, thirst, sleep or death ; and are just 
as destitute of merit. By supplying the necessary 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 183 

set of natural conditions, any one of these phenom- 
ena may be produced at pleasure. Let a man in 
good health fast about three days, and intense hun- 
ger will result. Let him, in connection with the 
proper mental action, fast about three days longer, 
and conversion or clairvoyance will result. Let him 
still fast about three days longer, and death will re- 
sult. The first of these three phenomena— hunger, 
and the last, death — are admitted on all sides to be 
entirely in accordance with the laws of Nature, and 
to be totally destitute of any merit. So of conver- 
sion and clairvoyance, the intermediate phenomena 
in this experiment. Produced in this case by pre- 
cisely the same process as are the hunger and the 
death, they are bound to be just as natural, and just 
as destitute of merit. The same is equally true of 
all these phenomena, when produced by any other 
means. 

Let these things be remembered by our religious 
friends who arrogantly assume that they alone are 
heirs of heaven, and that all the rest of us are 
doomed to eternal damnation. Let these persons 
understand that so far from being a proof that they 
are better fitted for heaven than are their equally 
honest but unconverted neighbors, their conversion 
is simply a proof that they are more nervous than 
are those neighbors — more susceptible to magnetic 
influences — more easily made the pliable and profit- 
able instruments of that proverbially cunning and 
arrogant but totally non-producing class of men who 
have been the curse of all nations and of all ages — 
the priests. Let our converted brethren fully under- 



184 SPIKITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

stand these facts, and they will cease to be the intol- 
erant bigots that too many of them now are. 

I wish it to be distinctly understood that no god 
has anything to do with the phenomena of conver- 
sion, clairvoyance, clairaudience, etc. ; that there is 
nothing peculiarly sacred about them ; and that they 
are just as proper subjects of scientific experimen- 
tation as are the penomena of telegraphy and tele- 
phonetics, or any other phenomena depending upon 
the agency of magnetism. Knowing that I regard 
the matter in this light, you will be able to under- 
stand that I do not mean to be either blasphemous 
or trivial when I suggest "that the day may yet come 
in which conversion and the other phenomena in 
question may be produced by machinery. Why 
should they not be thus produced ? They are the 
results of certain causes, and if a magnetic machine 
could be so constructed as to supply these causes, 
would not the effects be bound to follow ? Start a 
few converting machines to running, and there is no 
telling how soon w r e might be able to convert the 
whole world. 

Remember that success, both in developing circles 
and in revival meetings, depends entirely upon the 
presence of certain natural conditions, most of which 
I have described. If any of these conditions be 
wanting, complete success is impossible. There can 
not be an effect without a corresponding cause. Let 
a spiritual circle be in session, and let the spiritual 
manifestations be all that could be desired. Then 
let some sudden and terrible fear seize upon the 
members of that circle, and these manifestations will 
instantly cease. The conditions upon which they 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 185 

depend will no longer be present. Sc of a revival 
meeting. Let it be in full blast. Let a whole brigade 
of first-class shouters be all exerting the utmost pow- 
ers of their lungs and their muscles at once. Then 
let the cry of " Fire !" reverberate through the 
church. In an instant every vestige of their joyful 
feelings will be gone from those shouters, and so 
far from trusting their God to save them, like fright- 
ened sheep they will trample one another to death 
in their frantic efforts to save themselves. Almost 
every year this fact is demonstrated anew by some 
fearful church accident. On such occasions the mag- 
netic conditions are entirely destroyed upon which 
depends that wonderfully joyful sensation called 
"heartfelt religion." The sensation of course ceases 
with the departure of the conditions upon whose 
presence it depends. The poor shouters then find 
that neither their God nor their religion is of the 
slightest use to them in their sudden and fearful 
danger. 

Even very trivial dangers or annoyances are suffi- 
cient to destroy the magnetic conditions upon which 
the joyful sensation in question depends. Any re- 
vival can be instantly checked by letting loose among 
the congregation a few dozen angry hornets or bum- 
blebees. It is utterly impossible for a man to get- 
religion, or even to retain what he has got, while 
angry hornets and bumblebees are buzzing and bum- 
bling and stinging in his hair, and under his clothes. 
If you do not believe this, try it. And now, let me 
ask, if the revival were the work of a god, as is always 
pretended, could his work be thus stopped by a few 
hornets or bumblebees ? 



186 SPIEITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

I now proceed to the consideration of inspiration, 
the last, and in some respects the highest, phase of 
spiritual mediumship. This is a purely spiritual 
phase, and is rather difficult to explain, from the fact 
that there is no corresponding method of communi- 
cation in common use among men. 

There are two distinct forms of inspiration. In 
the one of these forms, without the use of language, 
facts unknown to him are communicated to the me- 
dium. In the other form, without any facts being 
communicated, the medium's mental powers are 
merely strengthened. 

The word inspiration is of Latin derivation, and 
means a breathing into. In order that you may un- 
derstand how a spirit, without the use of either words 
or signs, is enabled to breathe, as it were, into a man 
thoughts and mental powers, you must understand 
that every man's brain is the center of a magnetic 
sphere of greater or less extent, which is pervaded 
by his own thoughts, and which may also at the same 
time be pervaded by the thoughts of another. You 
must also understand that every spirit's brain is 
likewise the center of an exactly similar magnetic 
sphere. Finally, you must understand that, like 
magnetism or electricity, a spirit has power to per- 
vade or take possession of the whole body of a man. 
The Bible and all history are full of instances in 
which persons have been thus pervaded or taken 
possession of by spirits either good or evil. 

Now let a spirit, in the manner just described, so 
permeate or take possession of the body of a man 
that the center of its brain shall fall upon the center 
of his. It is evident that like the light from two 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 187 

candles placed near each other, the magnetic or 
thought sphere of the spirit and that of the man 
now coincide, or occupy the same space at the same 
time. It is also equally evident that, so long as this 
brain union continues, the thoughts of the spirit are 
all bound to equally pervade the brain of the man, 
and to become his property. So of the man's 
thoughts. The spirit obtains possession of them all. 
This silent and mysterious interchange of thoughts 
is one form of what we call inspiration. The world 
has always been filled with persons thus inspired. 

Were it not for the physical impossibility of mak- 
ing their brain centers coincide, two living persons 
could thus mutually inspire each other just as easily 
as can a man and a spirit. Indeed, even as it is, this 
form of inspiration does exist in different degrees 
of perfection among the living. The magnetic or 
thought spheres of two persons, especially if they 
differ in sex, and be as unlike as possible in their 
magnetic conditions, very frequently so unite that 
the thoughts and the emotions of the one become at 
the same time the thoughts and the emotions of the 
other. Indeed, perfect love, the only true marriage, 
consists in this very union. A man and a woman 
thus united are truly married without that miserable, 
meaningless mummery, the marriage ceremony of a 
priest. Marriage is entirely a natural phenomenon, 
and none of the operations of nature are ever de- 
pendent upon the ceremonies of a priest. Marriage, 
in its perfection, existed long before priestly ceremo- 
nies were invented, or human laws were known. The 
union of unlike magnetisms in the formation of mar- 
riage is no more dependent upon the ceremony of a 



188 SPIKITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

priest than is the union of oxygen and hydrogen in 
the formation of water, or that of the primary colors 
in the formation of solar light. A man and a woman, 
united, in the manner I have described, by the eter- 
nal and unchangeable laws of nature, do indeed 
become one — one in joy, one in sorrow, one in all 
the hopes, the fears, and the aspirations of life. 
Such persons are truly joined together by what you 
call God, and in no other way does he ever join them 
together. If, then, a man and a woman be not thus 
joined together, they are not married, no matter how 
many priests may have pronounced them man and 
wife. At best such parties are simply living together 
in legalized prostitution. It is of the real marriage, 
the God-made union, and not of the legalized prosti- 
tution, that Jesus speaks, when he says : " What 
therefore God hath joined together, let no man put 
asunder." He says nothing about what the priest 
hath joined together. Indeed, as I shall fully show in 
a future lecture, he wished to protect the true mar- 
riage from all human interference. Our marriage 
laws, as I shall also show in that same lecture, are in 
direct conflict with this command. They put asunder 
what God hath joined together. 

In the other form of inspiration the spirit, in the 
same way, pervades with his magnetic or thought 
force the brain of the man whom he wishes to 
inspire. In this form, however, mental power alone, 
and not ready-made thoughts, is communicated. To 
render this more clear, let us compare the man's 
brain to a steam box which from a small boiler is 
supplied with a certain amount of steam. It is evi- 
dent that this steam box can exert upon the machinery 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 189 

no greater force than itself receives from the boiler. 
From another boiler, however, let an additional 
supply of steam be turned into this box, and then, of 
course, it can exert upon the machinery a force equal 
to the sum of the forces which it receives from the 
two boilers. So with the man. His brain being 
supplied by inspiration, with a stream of thought- 
force in addition to his own, is enabled, so long as 
his brain can bear the increased pressure, to perform 
mental labors far beyond the natural powers of his 
mind. This form of inspiration is very common. 
Nearly all the truly grand thoughts ever conceived 
have been due to its influence. Persons of feeble 
constitutions, however, should not indulge in this 
form of inspiration. You can readily understand 
that by subjecting them to the force of an additional 
supply of steam, a weak steam box, or weak machin- 
ery, might be suddenly destroyed. Let this hint 
suffice. 

Let us now consider the value of that which is 
communicated or produced by means of inspiration. 
It is generally assumed that whatever is given by 
inspiration is, for that reason alone, necessarily true. 
This assumption, however, as I shall show, is totally 
destitute of foundation. The facts are that inspired 
writings, and other inspired communications, are just 
as liable to be false as are those which are unin- 
spired. All this I will prove. 

In the first form of inspiration — that in which 
ready-made thoughts are communicated — the state- 
ments are all the spirit's own, all manufactured in his 
own brain. Admitting, then, that the inspired per- 
son, or medium, be honest, and that he gives us pre- 



190 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

cisely what the spirit gives him, we still have no 
assurance of the truth of that which is communicated. 
Its truth depends entirely upon the character for 
veracity of the spirit that makes the communication. 
If we know nothing of his character in that respect, 
his inspired communications, especially if in them- 
selves they be unreasonable, must be set down as at 
least doubtful. We must remember that a spirit is 
not necessarily any more truthful than is a man. . 

In the other form of inspiration — that in which 
mental power alone is communicated — the statements 
are all the inspired person's own, all manufactured 
in his own brain. Their truth, then, depends entirely 
upon the man's own character for veracity. In- 
spiration has simply given him an increase of mental 
power, not, necessarily, an increase of honesty. In- 
deed, he may be just as truly inspired to tell a lie as 
to tell the truth. Thus you see that, in no case, is 
inspiration of itself any proof of the. truth of that 
which is communicated by means of it. Theologians 
mislead the people in regard to this matter. 

For obvious reasons nearly all priests claim that 
the Bible was given by inspiration of God, and that 
consequently its teachings must be true. In reply I 
will say that this is all a barefaced priestly assump- 
tion, totally unwarrantable by the facts, and conse- 
quently utterly worthless as argument. "We have 
not a particle of proof, either external or internal, 
that the Bible was given by inspiration at all ; and, 
assuming that it was, we have not a particle of proof 
that God was the source of that inspiration. Indeed, 
as I have already shown, we have no proof at all that 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 191 

there is any God. His existence rests entirely upon 
unwarrantable assumptions. 

Assuming, however, that there is such a being, that 
the writers of the Bible were inspired by him, and 
that, through the hands of a thousand unknown and 
uninspired copyists, translators, designing priests, 
and partisan councils, those writings have reached 
us uncorrupted, have we still any proof of the truth 
of those writings ? None. Is not the fact that they 
were given by inspiration of God a positive proof 
that they are* true ? Certainly not. Do I call in 
question God's character for veracity ? On my own 
authority I do not. I know nothing about his char- 
acter for veracity, or for anything else, except what 
I learn from the Bible, and from the priests. The 
Bible, however, does call in question his character 
for veracity, as well as for most of the other virtues, 
and clearly shows that in regard to many of them he 
was certainly most wofully wanting. The Bible, in- 
deed, represents God as a mere magnified reflection 
of the Jewish leaders, in whose hands he seems first 
to have made his appearance. Those leaders seem 
to have made him in their own likeness and image. 
At any rate, he is represented as being the God of 
the Jews alone, and as being himself, in all respects, 
a Jew. Like other Jews of that time, he is repre- 
sented as being cruel, partial, avaricious, deceitful, 
revengeful, and unjust ; a violator of oaths, an 
employer and rewarder of liars, a promoter of slavery, 
of polygamy, of concubinage, of robberies, of whole- 
sale butcheries, etc. This being his character, as 
given by his own inspired writers, it seems to me 



192 SPIBITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

that we should regard communications coming from 
him as at least of doubtful authenticity. 

I am aware that I am using very bold language — 
bolder perhaps than any other public speaker has 
ever yet dared to use. I am aware that any man, 
even a monarch, who had dared to use such language 
at no very distant period in the past, would have 
perished by the most horrible tortures at the hands 
of the professed followers of the merciful Jesus. I 
am aware, too, that almost daily I meet good ortho- 
dox Christians who, if they only possessed the power 
to do so, would at once proceed to experiment upon 
me with fire because of the expression of my honest 
religious convictions. As it is, to the full extent of 
their power they proscribe me in my profession, and 
strive to render my life one of poverty, of hardships, 
and of sorrows. And yet I speak nothing but simple 
truths which ought to be known to the world. In 
former works I have fully established all I have said, 
and more, concerning the character of the God of 
the Bible. As properly connected with the subject 
of inspiration, I will now briefly examine his char- 
acter for veracity, and for fair dealing with the 
inhabitants of earth. 

Since, in making this examination, I shall be com- 
pelled to come in conflict with some of the life-long 
and the most fondly cherished religious prejudices 
of many of my hearers, I wish you to reflect that, 
however otherwise it may appear from your own 
standpoint, from mine there is nothing in the least 
blasphemous, sacrilegious, irreverent, or improper, 
in the making of such an examination. Reflect that 
just as Brahm, Josh, Jupiter, or Juggernaut stands 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 193 

to your own candid judgments, so does the God of 
the Bible stand to mine. Reflect that just as you 
regard Juggernaut, for instance, so I regard the God 
of the Bible, as a purely human, and a decidedly 
hurtful, invention, gotten up by the priests for the 
purpose of giving themselves power over the igno- 
rant, superstitious, and credulous masses. Reflect 
that as yourselves, with perfectly proper motives, 
could enter into an examination of Juggernaut's 
character, so I, with equally proper motives, can and 
do enter into an examination of the character of the 
God of the Bible. Indeed, we differ very little. On 
the very best of grounds you reject all the gods of the 
world but one — the one with which you were stuffed 
before you were old enough to reason, and concerning 
whom you have never since dared to exercise your 
reason. On precisely the same grounds I reject that 
one also, just as you would if, like myself, you dared 
to make him a subject of investigation, just as you 
make the other gods. 

In Num. xiv, 30, we read : " Doubtless ye shall 
not come into the land concerning which I sware to 
make you dwell therein, save Caleb the son of 
Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun." Here God 
admits that he had sworn to put the Hebrews, to 
whom he is speaking, in possession of a certain land 
or country, to which they were now on their way. 
Having worked himself up, however, into a towering 
rage, because the people had believed the reports of 
certain scouts whom he himself had sent out, he now 
declares that he will not fulfil his sworn promise ; 
that, so far from leading them into a land of plenty, 
as he had sworn that he would, he will cause them 



194 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

to miserably perish in the wilderness. The history 
of this affair shows that he actually did, in direct 
violation of his sworn promise, carry out this cruel 
threat. 

And now what do you call this wilful failure to 
fulfil his sworn promise ? In the latter part of the 
thirty-fourth verse we read : " . . . and ye shall 
know my breach of promise." Since his treacherous 
act was a breach of promise, and since he himself 
calls it by that name, dare you call it anything else ? 

Since God is omniscient, he certainly knew when 
making the promise in question that he would never 
fulfil it. Knowing this, he certainly did not intend 
to fulfil it. He could not have intended to do that 
which he knew he never would do. Besides this, 
being himself omnipotent, there was no power in 
the universe could have prevented him from fulfill- 
ing that promise, had he desired and intended to 
fulfil it. With him, to will was to accomplish. He 
foresaw all the circumstances of the case, and him- 
self had full control of those circumstances. He 
foresaw his own breach of promise, and the conse- 
quent destruction of the Hebrews in the wilderness. 
In order to foresee these things, he had, of necessity, 
to foreordain them. He could not have foreseen, as 
unchangeable facts in the future, anything except 
what he himself had determined should be. He 
alone had the planning of the future. It is evident, 
then, that he deliberately made a false promise to 
the Hebrews, and that, when he made that promise, 
he had treacherously planned their destruction. If, 
then, he inspired the unknown author of the book of 
Numbers to write the truth, he himself stands con- 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 195 

victed of the very worst form of promise-breaking 
and unfair dealing. If, however, he inspired that 
author to write a lie, he himself still stands convicted 
of wilful falsehood, in thus unnecessarily inspiring 
the author to write a lie. In any possible view of 
the case, therefore, your God stands convicted of 
falsehood and unfair dealing. 

In 2 Chron. xviii, 19-22, we read : " And the Lord 
said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he 
may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead ? And one 
spake saying after this manner, and another saying 
after that manner. Then there came out a spirit, and 
stood before the Lord, and said, I will entice him. 
And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith ? And he 
said, I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth 
of all his prophets. And the Lord said, Thou shalt 
entice him, and thou shalt also prevail : go out and 
do even so. Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath 
put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, 
and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee." 
What plans for the enticing of Ahab to his destruc- 
tion were proposed by God's other advisers we are 
not informed. We are informed, however, as you 
see, that God was best pleased to accomplish this 
object by wholesale and systematic lying, and that 
he employed an expert in this valuable art to carry 
out his plans. 

In this affair we certainly have an example of gen- 
uine spiritual mediumship. A genuine spirit makes 
genuine, though false, communications through cer- 
tain genuine mediums called prophets. We also 
have in this affair another proof that whenever it 
suits his purpose to do so the God of the Bible is 



196 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

wont to resort to real hard lying. Of necessity, this 
account is either true or false. If false, then, accord- 
ing to your own teachings, God inspired the unknown 
author to write a falsehood. If true, then God did 
resort to the despicable expedient of employing an 
unblushing liar to lure Ahab and his followers to 
destruction. These victims of divine lying were 
God's own children, whom, by simply willing that 
that they should become so, he could have rendered 
good and happy men. In any view of the case God 
stands before us convicted of falsehood and unfair 
dealing. 

In Jer. iv, 10, we read : " Then said I, Ah, Lord 
God ! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people 
and Jerusalem, saying, Ye shall have peace ; whereas 
the sword reach eth unto the soul." In xx, 7, we 
also read : " O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I 
was deceived." Did God really act the part of a de- 
ceiver, as Jeremiah says he did, or did he inspire 
Jeremiah to write a lie concerning these things? In 
either case, what kind of a character has God for 
veracity and fair dealing? 

In Ezek. xiv, 9, we read : " And if the prophet be 
deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord 
have deceived that prophet." Did God thus deceive 
prophets, or did he inspire Ezekiel to write a lie 
concerning these things ? In either case, what kind 
of a character has God for veracity and fair dealing ? 

In 2 Thess. ii, 11, 12, we read : " And for this 
cause God shall send them strong delusion that they 
should believe a lie : that they all might be 
damned. . . ." Of necessity, this assertion is 
either true or false. If it be true, then God actually 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 197 

does furnish certain persons with a lie, and then, 
with his almighty power, delude them into believing 
it, and all " for this cause : that they all might be 
damned." If it be false, then God inspired Paul to 
write a lie concerning this matter. In either case, 
what a fearful character it gives God ! Can all the 
theological whitewashers of the world ever render 
such a being worthy the love and 'the adoration of 
good and intelligent men ? 

Admitting that Paul writes the truth, and that for 
the sole purpose of thereby devising an excuse to 
damn them God does thus irresistibly delude certain 
classes of persons into believing a lie, which, of neces- 
sity, he must have ready for them, what proof have 
our orthodox brethren that they are not the very 
persons thus deluded, and thus booked for eternal 
damnation ? Would it not be just as fair for him to 
thus delude them into believing a lie, " that they all 
might be damned," as it would be for him to thus 
delude anybody else for the same purpose? Indeed, 
by reading the whole chapter, you will see that the 
language in question is certainly not applied to un- 
believers. It is true, as we learn elsewhere, that 
these are to be damned, but their damnation is to be 
because they have not believed at all, and not because 
they have believed a lie. Paul describes those to 
whom he applies the language as sitting in the 
temple of God, claiming to be the people of God, and 
arrogating to themselves the powers and prerogatives 
of God. They were to consist of a portion of the 
church who should fall away from the church, but 
who should still be loud professors of religion, while 
following the false doctrines of their heretical leaders. 



198 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

The victims, then, of God's " strong delusion " 
must, of necessity, be looked for inside of some 
church organization. All theologians admit this fact, 
and differ only when they come to fix upon the par- 
ticular sect or division of the church who are to be 
thus deluded and damned. For obvious reasons no 
sect fix upon themselves. They think it a very 
lovely act for God, by means of so treacherous a trick, 
to thus delude and damn some rival sect, but for him 
to thus trick and damn themselves they think would 
be grossly cruel and unfair. 

In view of all these things the Protestants claim, 
and very clearly prove, to their own minds at least, 
that the Catholics correspond exactly to the descrip- 
tion given by Paul of those whom God proposes to 
delude, and then to damn for being deluded. The 
Catholics, on the other hand, claim, and just as 
clearly prove, the same in regard to the Protestants. 
I suspect that both sects are about right in their 
views on this subject, and that both will be tricked 
and damned. Indeed, it seems to me that damnation 
is a very appropriate fate for those who, with their 
eyes open, still persist in worshiping a God whose 
own word proves him to be cruel, partial, treach- 
erous, and unjust. Knowing God's character, these 
parties should not complain if they are damned. In 
any view of the case there seems to be very little 
chance to escape damnation. A great portion of us 
are to be damned for what we do not believe. A 
great portion of the balance are to be damned for 
what they do believe. The religion on which they 
are depending for salvation is extremely liable to be 
the very " strong delusion " which God has sent 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 199 

the in, "that they might be damned." Let us all, 
then, prepare for damnation. 

These are but a few of a vast number of passages 
which I might quote, all going to prove that the God 
of the Bible is by no means always the God of truth. 
It is true, however, that this same God, as now taught, 
is a much better being. He has often been re- 
modeled, as I could easily show, and greatly im- 
proved, since the communications which I have 
quoted were made. He is now a magnified reflec- 
tion of the men of to-day, and is just as much 
superior to his ancient self as the men of to-day are 
superior to the men of those ancient times. As men 
improve, so in all cases do their gods improve. 

And now, in conclusion, I will say that I condemn 
no one for not believing the doctrines which I teach. 
I leave all such intolerance to the members of the 
various churches. No man can help either what he 
believes or what he disbelieves. His will has no 
control over these things. He believes or he dis- 
believes a thing, simply because he has no power to 
do otherwise. For us, therefore, to condemn one 
another for honest differences of opinion on any 
subject is exceedingly unreasonable and unjust. 
Why, then, do you so promptly condemn me as a 
bad and dangerous man, fit only to be persecuted 
in this life, and damned in the next, simply because 
I am totally unable to accept your religious creeds ? 
I am just as sincere in my religious views as any of 
you can possibly be in yours. Were I a hypocrite, I 
would profess your religion, because it is popular. 
All hypocrites profess the popular religion. Noth- 
ing but sincerity can bind a man to views so unpopu- 



200 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP 

lar as are mine. Would you have me as an honest 
man retain these views, which I do believe, or as a 
hypocrite adopt your views, which I do not believe ? 

Besides all this, my views are the results of ten 
times more study and investigation than most of you 
have ever devoted to this subject. I have been all 
over the grounds which you occupy. I fully investi- 
gated your creeds, and rejected them with sorrow, 
only when my reason and my conscience compelled 
me to reject them. Believing these creeds to be 
true gold, and wishing to demonstrate that they were 
so, I- subjected them to the proper test for gold. 
Contrary to my fondest expectations, however, 
they crumbled to worthless dust in ' the crucible. 
Then with unutterable sorrow I abandoned them. 
In consequence of these long and thorough investi- 
gations, I am prepared to judge your doctrines. On 
the other hand, you have not been over all the 
grounds which I occupy ; you have not thoroughly 
investigated my doctrines, and hence are not pre- 
pared to judge them. 

At fifteen years of age I was certainly a sincere 
believer in the Christian religion. While too young 
to reason, I had been thoroughly stuffed with it. I 
had also passed through that joyful magnetic condi- 
tion called conversion ; and had I remained as pro- 
foundly ignorant as I then was, I would doubtless 
have been to-day just as sincere, just as happy a 
believer in that religion, as I then was. However it 
may be with others, with me ignorance was abso- 
lutely necessary to faith. In spite of my utmost 
efforts to retain it, my faith departed with the dissi- 
pation of my ignorance. 



SPIKITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 201 

You think it a terrible thing for me to reject 
your particular God, and your particular religion ; 
and yet you, in the very same way, reject every other 
god, and every other religion. "With the single ex- 
ception of the God with whom you were stuffed 
in childhood — the only God concerning whom you 
have never dared to exercise your reason — we are 
unanimously agreed that all the gods of the world 
are priestly impositions upon human ignorance. We 
are unanimously agreed, too, that for us to worship 
any of these impositions would be one of the basest 
forms of hypocrisy and wickedness. With regard to 
the one remaining God, I have dared to use my rea- 
son, and have found him to be, like all the others, a 
priestly imposition upon human ignorance. For me, 
therefore, to worship him would be just as basely 
hypocritical and wicked an act, on my part, as it 
would be on yours to worship Brahm, Josh, Jugger- 
naut, or any other god in whom you have no faith. 
And would you have me be thus basely hypocritical 
and wicked ? Convince me that your God is indeed 
a living reality, and then, and not till then, can I, as 
a truly conscientious man, bow the knee to him in 
adoration. If you cannot thus convince me, the fault 
is not in me ; it is in the weakness of your own 
argument. 

Except our own reason and our own conscience, 
what have we to guide us in regard to these things ? 
And are your reason and your conscience any more 
to you than mine are to me? If, as you teach, a 
faithful adherence to the dictates of your own reason 
and your own conscience in regard to these things 
be a virtue in you and a passport to heaven, how 



202 SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 

can the same faithful adherence to the dictates of 
my own reason and of my own conscience in regard 
to these things be, as yon teach that it is, a crime in 
me, and a passport to hell ? 

How came you by your particular God, and your 
particular religion ? Did you examine and compare 
all the gods and all the religions, and then choose 
the best? Had the relative merits of the various 
gods and of the various religions anything to do 
with the matter ? Had you any choice at all ? 
Were you not just as much born to your particular 
God and to your particular religion as you were 
to your particular color, and to your particular na- 
tionality? Is not the same true of the Hindoos, 
the Ethiopians, and all others in regard to their 
respective gods, religions, colors, and nationalities ? 
Are not all men equally born to these things? 
Are not all stuffed in childhood with the religion 
of the particular country or community in which 
they happen to be born ? Is the fact that a Hin- 
doo happens to be born to the gods and the 
religion of Hindostan any proof that those are true 
gods, and that a true religion ? Is the fact that an 
Ethiopian happens to born to the gods and the 
religion of Ethiopia any proof that those are true 
gods, and that a true religion ? And is the fact that 
a European or an American happens to be born to 
the gods and the religion of Europe and of America 
any better proof that those are true gods, and that a 
true religion ? If the fortuitous circumstance of 
your birth be any proof in favor of your gods and 
your religion, is not the same fortuitous circumstance 
in his case an equal proof in favor of every other 



SPIRITUAL MEDIUMSHIP. 203 

man's gods and every other man's religion ? Can 
you advance a single argument in favor of the genu- 
ineness of your gods and of your religion which 
every other man cannot, with equal force and pro- 
priety, advance in favor of his ? Had you happened 
to be born in India or in Ethiopia, and had you been 
early stuffed, as you certainly would have been, with 
the gods and the religion of that country, would you 
not have been just as sincere believers in those gods 
and in that religion as you now are in the gods, 
and in the religion, to which you did happen to 
be born, and with which you did happen to be 
early stuffed ? But in that case would your belief in 
them have been any proof that those were true gods, 
and that a true religion ? And is your present belief 
worth any more than your equally sincere belief 
would have been in that case ? Is your belief, 
adopted without reason or investigation, worth any 
more than is the belief, adopted in the same way, of 
the worshiper of some other gods ? Think of these 
things, and learn to be reasonable and just. 

Note. — In addition to the five phases of Spiritual mediumship of 
which I have treated in this lecture, there seems to be another 
form called " Materialization." If this be a genuine phase, it is 
indisputably the most important phase of all. In regard to this 
phase, however, I am still only an investigator. As yet I cannot 
give this to the world as an established phase of Spiritualism. 



LECTUBE V. 

OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

In answering the numerous objections which have 
been urged against Spiritualism, I shall address my 
language principally to the members of the various 
denominations of the Christian Church. I do this 
simply because it is from these persons that nearly 
all the objections in question originate. To most of 
these objections I shall give a double answer. In 
the first place, I shall show that the objections are 
not founded on facts, and that, consequently, they do 
not really exist. In the second place, I shall clearly 
establish the same, or at least parallel, objections to 
many of the teachings of the Bible and of the Chris- 
tian Church. In giving these parallel objections, I 
shall be almost certain to tread, and rather heavily 
too, upon the theological corns of many of my ten- 
der-footed, if not tender-hearted, orthodox brethren. 
It would be well for them, therefore, to begin taking 
up their feet out of my way. 

One of the most common, and, as many persons 
seem to believe, one of the most unanswerable, objec- 
tions urged against Spiritualism is, that it is all a 
humbug ; that all its manifestations consist merely 
in " tricks " or " feats of jugglery," performed by the 
mediums themselves. 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED 205 

This objection is really too absurd to be worthy of 
a refutation. It is never offered by persons of suffi- 
cient intelligence to know what they are talking 
about. It always comes from the unreasoning rabble, 
who are equally ignorant of the principles upon which 
spiritual manifestations depend, and of those upon 
which feats of legerdemain or jugglery are per- 
formed. The all-convincing argument ever used by 
this class of persons against whatever they do not 
like is this same hackneyed and unsupported cry of 
" Humbug !" All intelligent persons know that this 
same cry may be, and that it has been, raised with 
equal force against all the spiritual manifestations 
and other so-called miracles upon which the Christian 
religion depends, as well as against every science 
known to man. 

Were any answer at all to this silly cry necessary, 
it would be sufficient to refer to my previous lectures, 
in which I not only fully established the genuineness 
of spiritual communications, but also clearly ex- 
plained the principles upon which they are made. 
"Were any further answer necessary, it would be 
sufficient to call attention to the well-known fact that 
a majority of our best mediums are children and 
uneducated persons, who are totally ignorant of the 
art of jugglery, and who would be detected in the 
very first attempt, should they undertake to impose 
upon an intelligent audience by resorting to trickery 
of any kind. 

It may be said that impostors have been detected 
among those professing to be spiritual mediums. 
Certainly, such impostors have been detected, and 
others of the same kind will doubtless be detected 



206 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

hereafter. The imposition, however, practiced by 
this class of impostors consists not in being spiritual 
mediums, but in professing to be such when they are 
not. When you have detected one of these impostors 
you have certainly not detected a genuine spiritual 
medium. Counterfeits have been detected on the 
best of banks. Indeed, no one ever goes to the trouble 
of counterfeiting the bills of a worthless bank. 
When you have detected a counterfeit, however, you 
have certainly not detected a genuine bill, nor are 
the genuine bills rendered any the less genuine by 
such counterfeits. Impostors have been detected 
among those professing to be Christians. But when 
you have detected such an impostor have you ex- 
posed Christianity? Are true Christians rendered 
any the less true by such impostors ? A traitor was 
detected among the apostles. But did the detection 
of that traitor expose all the other apostles as 
traitors ? Benedict Arnold was detected as a traitor 
to his country. But did his treason make traitors of 
Washington and of all the other patriots of the Rev- 
olution? Indeed, impostors have been detected in 
all departments of human society. But are any of 
those departments rendered any the less real, or any 
the less necessary, by such impostors? Can there, 
indeed, be a counterfeit without something genuine 
to be counterfeited ? Besides all this, the impostors 
who have been detected among those professing to 
be spiritual mediums have never been children or 
ignorant persons, who would be the most readily 
detected should they attempt fraud of any kind. In 
all cases of detection the impostors have been per- 
sons of more or less real skill in the practice of 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 207* 

deception. Such persons, and such only, trusting in 
their own skill, have ventured, in the name of Spirit- 
ualism, to practice frauds upon the people. The 
manifestations, too, which these impostors profess 
to exhibit, are rarely such as are recognized at all by 
Spiritualism. Instead of simple raps, table-tippings, 
etc., these impostors almost invariably propose to 
exhibit some " New and Startling Developments." 
These impostors are nearly sure, also, to demand 
money for the seeing of their exhibitions. The im- 
position, therefore, consists not in the things 
exhibited, since these do not pertain at all to Spirit- 
ualism, but in the abusing of the name of Spiritualism 
by using it in connection with their infamous frauds. 
You cannot possibly hold such vile pretenders in 
more utter detestation than do all true Spiritual- 
ists, nor can you be any more willing to expose 
them. 

Another very common and by far more plausible 
objection urged against Spiritualism is that, unknown 
perhaps to the mediums, its manifestations are pro- 
duced simply by human magnetism, and that no 
spiritual intelligences have anything to do in their 
production. I once held this view myself, and hav- 
ing become a thorough unbeliever in the immortality 
of man as an individualized intelligence, I undertook 
to investigate Spiritualism for the express purpose 
of exposing it. So far, however, from proving it to 
be an imposition, as I expected they would, my 
investigations proved it to be a glorious truth. My 
unbelief in the immortality of the human spirit, to- 
gether with many of my strongest materialistic 
prejudices were overcome, and under the benign, the 



208 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

soul-cheering, the soul-elevating, influences of Spir- 
itualism, I became a better and a happier man. And 
thus must it be with all who give it so thorough and 
so fair an investigation. Having in previous lectures 
already fully answered this objection, I shall now 
give it only a very brief notice. 

Spiritual communications, especially when made 
by means of physical manifestations, involve a species 
of telegraphy which, of necessity, depends in part 
upon the action of magnetism. No intelligent Spirit- 
ualist pretends to deny this fact. That the presence 
of magnetism, however, precludes the participation 
of spiritual intelligences, in the production of these 
communications, we all do most emphatically deny. 
Magnetism alone could never produce an intelligible 
communication. It is merely the vehicle by means 
of which such communications are conveyed. In all 
kinds of magnetic telegraphy there must be, of 
necessity, an intelligence at each end of the magnetic 
line. This is a fact too well established to require 
any proof. No sane man would now contend that 
because magnetism is involved in their transmission 
all the communications made by means of the 
ordinary magnetic telegraph are somehow, uncon- 
sciously to himself, produced by the very person that 
receives them, and that no intelligence at the other 
end of the line has anything to do in their produc- 
tion. Can you, then, be sure of your own sanity 
when you set up this very same absurd argument in 
regard to spiritual telegraphy? Do not the two 
forms of telegraphy act substantially upon the same 
principles ? When, by means of either of these 
forms of telegraphy, you receive an intelligible com- 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 209 

munication, are you not absolutely certain that there 
is an intelligence, from whom it comes, at the other 
end of the line? Make it certain, then, that the in- 
telligence in question is not a living man, and do 
you not make it equally certain that he is a spirit? 

The only question that can arise is in regard to the 
amount of evidence, or of precaution, necessary to 
render it absolutely certain that the communications 
are not made by living men. Thousands of the most 
critical tests, made at different times and at different 
places, by men distinguished alike for their intelli- 
gence, their integrity, and their scientific knowledge, 
have fully established the fact that communications 
are received, which, under the circumstances, could 
not possibly be made by men in the body. I myself 
have made many such tests. I have not time now 
to describe these tests, nor would I do so if I had. 
To you they would constitute only hearsay evidence, 
and, as I did not myself accept Spiritualism on this 
this kind of evidence, I will not ask you to thus 
accept it. If it cannot compel belief, then I have no 
further use for it. Name your own tests, then, so 
they be only fair, and any good test medium will 
assist you in making them. In this way, by the evi- 
dence of your own senses, you will be fully convinced 
of the truth of all I have said. 

In concluding this part of my subject I will merely 
call attention to the fact that the objection under 
consideration bears with as much force against many 
of the so-called miracles of the Bible and of the 
Christian church as it does against what are called 
spiritual manifestations. Give it, then, all the force 
you claim for it, and you will ruin your own religion. 



210 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

You will do this, too, without inflicting any very 
serious injury upon Spiritualism. You will affect 
only the lower phases of mediumship, leaving entirely 
unscathed the higher and more glorious phases, 
clairvoyance, clairaudience, and inspiration. 

A third objection, often urged against Spiritualism, 
is that many of its manifestations are wanting in dig- 
nity — that many of its communications are of a trivial 
nature. This, however, depends entirely upon what 
the objectors regard as a want of dignity, and as con- 
stituting trivialness. Measured by the standard of 
these grave and dignified personages, an equally 
large percentage of all the communications among 
the living would doubtless prove to be equally want- 
ing in dignity, equally trivial in their nature. And 
yet, who would think of condemning all intercourse 
among the living on the ground that in this inter- 
course many of the communications are wanting in 
dignity ? 

In reality, there are in nature no such things as 
dignity and trivialness. These, like the words large- 
ness and smallness, are merely relative terms applied 
to qualities, not as they really exist in nature, but as 
they stand related to some arbitrary standard with 
which they are contrasted. As the same thing may 
be very large when contrasted with one object taken 
as a standard, and very small when contrasted with^ 
another, so the same thing may possess great dignity 
when measured by one standard, and may be very 
trivial when measured by another. Contrasted with 
a mustard seed, an apple is very large. Contrasted 
with a mountain, it is very small. So of the dignity 
or the trivialness of a thing. It all depends upon 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 211 

the standard by which it is measured. No two men 
have the same standard by which to determine what 
is dignified in its nature, and what is trivial. To 
the dancing master, for instance, certain movements 
of the body may appear to possess all the elements 
of dignity, and he may regard the teaching of these 
movements as a very dignified occupation. To the 
great military chieftain, however, wholly absorbed in 
the movements of mighty armies, and in the conduct- 
ing of battles that cause whole nations to tremble, no 
profession, perhaps, could be more wanting in dignity 
than that of the dancing master, and no occupation 
more trivial than that of the dancers. Objectors 
would do well to remember these things. They 
would also do well to remember that the two qualities 
to which the terms dignity and trivialness are applied 
are, like the qualities of largeness and smaliness, 
equally natural, equally proper, and equally neces- 
sary in the economy of nature. 

However things may appear when measured by 
our arbitrary standards, there is, in nature, nothing 
really undignified— nothing really trivial. Every- 
thing should be measured by its own standard. 
Measured thus, all things, equally natural, will be 
found equal in dignity. The gentle zephyr, the 
sparkling dew-drop, the sports of a child, and the 
growing of a plant, will then be found just as full of 
dignity, just as natural, just as proper, and just as 
necessary, as are the terrible tornado, the mighty 
ocean, the carnage of a great battle, and the awful 
quakings of the earth herself. Let each be thus 
measured by his own standard, and the little busy 
bee will be found just as full of dignity, just as nat- 



212 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

ural, just as proper, and just as necessary in the 
economy of nature, as is the mighty elephant, or the 
monstrous whale. Throughout all the departments 
of nature, dignity, propriety, and necessity are 
equally distributed. Unless, then, a thing be a de- 
parture from nature, it cannot be wanting in any of 
these qualities. If it seem to be wanting in any of 
them, we may be sure that it has been measured by 
a false standard. 

Let us now apply these principles to spiritual 
communications, and see whether they do, or do not, 
deserve to be stigmatized as undignified and trivial. 
In the first place, then, if these communications 
be genuine — and this you are not now disputing — 
they demonstrate the immortality of the soul, and 
this is more than all the dignified religious preaching 
and writing of the world have ever been able to 
accomplish. Be their character what it may, the fact 
that communications do come at all from spiritual 
intelligences proves beyond all dispute, not only that 
such intelligences do exist, but also that communica- 
tions between them and ourselves are possible. And 
can anything be really trivial which thus so fully 
establishes the most important of all truths ? Was f 
the falling of an apple a trivial thing when it led to 
the discovery of the true structure of the universe ? 
Had even the most trivial' message imaginable from 
the other shore of death's dark and mysterious river 
reached me long years ago, and thus demonstrated to 
me the existence of a life beyond this, I should have 
been spared the long night of indescribable darkness 
and infidel despair which helped to render me as you 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 213 

now behold me — a prematurely aged and compara- 
tively feeble man. 

Besides all this, are not most of the communica- 
tions in question from the spirits of men whose 
communications in this life were usually of an equally 
trivial nature ? Are not the communications, then, 
just such as we should expect ? Are they not just 
what they should be to be genuine ? Have we any 
reason to believe that death, by some miraculous 
process, instantaneously confers upon men a great 
increase of knowledge and dignity ? If the communi- 
cations, professing to come from an ignorant and un- 
dignified man, were distinguished for the amount of 
learning and dignity displayed in them, would any 
of his friends on earth recognize them as his produc- 
tions ? Is not the case better as it now is ? And are 
not most of these communications as dignified as are 
the questions which call them forth ? 

Another reason why we should expect spiritual 
communications to be just what they are is the fact 
that they are usually made to spiritual circles whose 
members, assembled in a social capacity, are far more 
disposed to indulge in light and merry conversation 
than they are to engage in the delivering and the 
hearing of solemn orthodox sermons and dignified 
orations. This is true of all social gatherings, 
whether spirits participate in them or not. They 
are meant for enjoyment, and not for displays of dig- 
nity or of eloquence. When spirits attend on such 
occasions they are usually imbued with the same 
happy social feeling that pervades the living portion 
of such assemblies, and whenever they have an 
opportunity to do so they add to the general enjoy- 



214 OBJECTIONS TO SPIEITUALISM ANSWERED. 

ment by making known their presence, and by 
making those light and merry communications which 
you stigmatize as trivial. All this is obviously just 
as it should be. At the meeting of loved ones, long 
separated by distance or by death, a great display of 
dignity would be very unnatural and very inappro- 
priate. "When serious and dignified communications 
are needed, and are properly called for from spirits 
capable of making them, and through mediums capa- 
ble of conveying them, they are usually received. 

You object that communications professing to 
come from the spirits of some of the greatest men 
that ever lived are frequently of this same light and 
trivial nature. Yery well. Such communications, 
from such men, are just as they should be. On social 
occasions, such as I have described, all the great men 
of the world have been accustomed to unbend from 
their usual dignity, and to enter as heartily as any 
others into the light and merry conversation going 
on around them. All great men know the immense 
value of good nonsense at the right time. By its use 
they are all benefited. If they did not occasionally 
use it they could not long bear the great weight of 
their wonderful mental labors. The Demostheneses, 
the Ciceros, the Patrick Henrys of the world have 
never been wont to attempt any of their grand dis- 
plays of eloquence at little social gatherings. Why, 
then, should you expect their spirits to attempt any 
such things now, especially when they have to rap 
out their words, letter by letter, on a table, or com- 
municate them through the organs of speech of an 
inferior person ?. 

No matter how large a ball may be it cannot be 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 215 

fired from a gun of smaller caliber than its own. No 
matter how skilful a musician may be, he cannot dis- 
play that skill upon a very poor and untuned instru- 
ment. The quality of the music, indeed, depends 
almost as much upon the excellence of the instrument 
as it does upon the skill of the performer. So the 
quality of spiritual communications depends almost 
as much upon the mediums through whom they are 
sent as they do upon the spirits who send them. 
Through a young boy, or an unlettered savage, a phi- 
losopher could not send, verbally, so dignified a 
message as he could deliver in person. He would be 
compelled to adapt his message to the carrying 
capacity of his messenger. Give him for a messenger, 
however, one who is also a philosopher, equal to 
himself, and then his message would not be impaired 
in its transmission. So let a spirit have for a medium 
a person in every way equal to himself, and his com- 
munications will not be less dignified than were those 
which he made while yet in the body. Inferior 
spirits easily find spirits equal to themselves. Their 
communications, therefore, rarely suffer. Not so, 
however, with spirits of a very high order. They 
rarely find mediums equal to themselves, and hence 
their communications nearly always suffer. Indeed, 
when they do chance to find mediums through whom 
they can do themselves justice, you are still no better 
satisfied. Your cry then is that such mediums are 
capable of doing all those things of themselves. In 
any case you condemn the communications. If they 
be impaired by coming through inferior mediums, 
you condemn them because of their inferiority. If 



216 OBJECTIONS TO SPIEITUALISM ANSWERED. 

they be not thus impaired, you condemn them be- 
cause of their superiority. 

I have now shown that, under the circumstances, 
all spiritual communications are just such as we 
ought to expect. That which you urge, therefore, as 
an objection to them is really a strong argument 
in favor of their genuineness. Impostors, indeed, 
would never be content to give only these common- 
place communications. As I have elsewhere remarked, 
they nearly always attempt to get off something new 
and startling. 

Having thus fully refuted your charge of trivial- 
ness, as applied to Spiritualism, I will now show that 
this charge bears with far greater force against your 
own religion. In doing this, I shall not notice the 
almost innumerable absurdities, obscenities, and 
trivialities peculiar to each of the various sects into 
which Christianity is divided. On the contrary, I 
shall go at once to the Bible, and from it show that, 
considering the dignity of character which you 
ascribe to him, your adopted God has made com- 
munications to men far more trivial than are any of 
those which you condemn among Spiritualists. I 
will make you sorry that you ever named triviality 
as an objection to Spiritualism. Indeed, I defy you 
•to advance any argument against Spiritualism that 
cannot with equal force be urged against your own 
religion. 

At one time the Hebrew God, whom you have 
adopted, turns tailor, dressmaker, and laundryman, 
and devotes whole chapters of the Bible to a descrip- 
tion of the various styles in which the priests' bon- 
nets, petticoats, etc., are to be made, of the various 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 217 

kinds of fringes which they are to have, etc., and 
how the various articles of clothing are to be cleansed. 
At another time he turns butcher, cook, and dish- 
washer, and devotes many other chapters to a descrip- 
tion of the manner in which oxen, sheep, goats, etc., 
are to be butchered ; of the various modes in which 
beef, mutton, etc., are to be cooked and served ; of 
the manner in which the skin, the fat, the suet, the 
caul, the kidneys, the blood, the feet, the head, the 
entrails, the heave-shoulder, the heave-breast, etc., 
are to be disposed of ; and, finally, of the manner in 
which the various kinds of dishes are to be washed. 
At another time he turns water-wizard, and has Moses 
walking over the ground, with a rod in his hand, to 
discover the location of water in the earth. At still 
another time he becomes a medico-detective, and 
teaches the priests how to discover the guilt of a 
woman, charged with adultery, by making her drink 
dirty water till she bursts open. 

You will admit that these communications came 
through the very best of mediums, and that, conse- 
quently, they did not suffer in their transmission. 
Coming, then, as you claim that they do come, unim- 
paired, from an infinitely perfect God, these com- 
munications should be infinitely perfect in dignity, 
and in every other excellence. But dare you assert 
that they possess any such infinite perfections ? Dare 
you undertake to prove that, in dignity or any other 
excellence, they are superior to the contents of our 
ordinary fashion-journals, our common cook-books, 
etc. ? 

In Ex. xxix, 9-25, we read : "And thou shalt gird 
them with girdles [Aaron and his sons], and put the 



218 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

bonnets on them. . . . And thou shalt cause a 
bullock to be brought before the tabernacle of the 
congregation ; and Aaron and his sons shall put 
their hands upon the head of the bullock. And thou 
shalt kill the bullock before the Lord by the door of 
the tabernacle of the congregation. And thou shalt 
take of the blood of the bullock, and put it upon the 
horns of the altar with thy finger, and pour all the 
blood beside the bottom of the altar. And thou 
shalt take all the fat that covereth the inwards, and 
the caul that is above the liver, and the two kidneys, 
and the fat that is upon them, and burn them upon 
the altar. But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, 
and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the 
camp : it is a sin offering. Thou shalt also take one 
ram : and Aaron and his sons shall put their hands 
upon the head of the ram. And thou shalt slay the 
ram, and thou shalt take of his blood, and sprinkle 
it round about upon the altar. And thou shalt cut 
the ram in pieces, and wash the inwards of him, and 
his legs, and put them unto his pieces, and unto his 
head. And thou shalt burn the whole ram upon the 
altar : it is a burnt offering unto the Lord : it is a 
sweet savour, an offering made by fire unto the Lord. 
And thou shalt take the other ram ; and Aaron and 
his sons shall put their hands upon the head of the 
ram. Then shalt thou kill the ram, and take of his 
blood, and put it upon the tip of the right ear of 
Aaron, and upon the tip of the right ear of his sons, 
and upon the thumb of their right hand, and upon 
the great toe of their right foot, and sprinkle the 
blood upon the altar round about. And thou shalt 
take of the blood that is upon the altar, and of the 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 219 

anointing oil, and sprinkle it upon Aaron, and upon 
his garments, and upon his sons, and upon the gar- 
ments of his sons with him. And he shall be hal- 
lowed, and his garments, and his sons, and his sons-' 
garments with him. Also thou shalt take of the ram 
the fat and the rump, and the fat that covereth 
the inwards, and the caul above the liver, and the 
two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them, and 
the right shoulder : for it is a ram of consecration. 
And one loaf of bread, and one cake of oiled bread, 
and one wafer of the basket of the unleavened bread, 
that is before the Lord. And thou shalt put all in 
the hands of Aaron, and in the hands of his sons ; 
and shalt wave them for a wave offering before the 
Lord. And thou shalt receive them of their hands 
and burn them upon the altar for a burnt offering, 
for a sweet savour before the Lord : it is an offering 
made by fire unto the Lord." 

Thus I might go on and quote chapter after chap- 
ter of such nauseous nonsense, all purporting to 
come from your adopted God, whom you represent 
as infinitely superior to any man, or to any human 
spirit. But are these writings infinitely superior to 
any human productions, or to any spiritual communi- 
cations ? If not, are they not more undignified for 
such a God to make than are any of our spiritual 
communications for a poor, unpretending spirit to 
make ? For our spirits, we claim no wisdom superior 
to that of men. Indeed, we regard our spirits merely 
as men, changed in their conditions, but not neces- 
sarily rendered either wiser or better by that change. 
From such beings we should expect very imperfect 
communications — just such, indeed, as we do actually 



220 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

receive. With your adopted God, however, the case 
is very different. For him you claim infinite perfec- 
tion in all things. Should not his communications, 
then, be infinitely perfect in wisdom, in dignity, and 
in all other good qualities ? Are not they an effect, 
of which he is the cause? And is not the effect 
always bound to be exactly as the cause ? Can an 
imperfect effect proceed from a perfect cause ? Are 
those productions of your God, which I have read, 
in any respect superior to many of the productions 
of men? If not, can your God then be in any respect 
superior to those men whose productions are equal 
or superior to his own? Is it not a universally 
admitted principle of philosophy that an effect can 
contain no element not present in the cause ? If, 
then, there be any want of dignity, any imperfection 
of any kind, in the productions of your God, are you 
not compelled to admit that he, too, is bound to be 
equally wanting in dignity, or in some other perfec- 
tion ? Dare you, however, make such an admission ? 
If not, are you not bound to claim that all his pro- 
ductions are infinitely perfect in all good qualities ? 
You are bound to choose one horn or the other of 
this dilemma. If you choose the one horn, you 
make your God inferior to many men ? If you 
choose the other horn, and claim that all of your 
God's productions are infinitely perfect in wisdom, 
in dignity, etc., what becomes of your charge of 
trivialness against Spiritualism ? If such balderdash 
as I have quoted from the Bible be infinitely perfect 
in dignity, can the spiritual communications, of 
which you complain, be so sadly wanting in dignity 
as you would have us believe ? 



OBJECTIONS TO STIKITUALISM ANSWEEED. 221 

Do you not now see that you have placed your- 
selves in an absurd position ? Can you still charge 
trivialness against spiritual communications which 
profess to come from poor, imperfect human spirits ? 
And can you, at the same time, make it appear that 
this wonderful God of yours displayed infinite dig- 
nity in coming down and hiding in the top of a 
mountain, and in devoting many months to the giving 
of such instructions as I have read to a small tribe 
of semi-barbarous men? Can you make it appear 
that he displayed infinite dignity when he entered 
the lists as a juggler to compete in legerdemain with 
the magicians of Egypt ? When he took up his 
abode in a small room of the tabernacle in order to 
regale himself with the savory odors of roast beef ; 
and when he- contracted with the Hebrews to pardon 
a certain amount of sin for a certain amount of 
various kinds of roast meats ? 

In addition to the payment of all these articles of 
food, which in those days this wonderful God of yours 
always charged for pardoning sins, he also prescribed 
many other conditions, without the observance of 
which by the people he either could not or would 
not pardon their sins. As you already know, one of 
these conditions was that the priests should have 
the tips of their right ears, of their right thumbs, 
and of their right great toes smeared with the blood 
of a ram. Had this ceremony been entirely omitted, 
or had the ram's blood been placed upon the left 
ears, the left thumbs, and left great toes of the 
priests, this whole plan of salvation would have 
proved an utter failure, and your wonderful God 
would have found himself compelled to eternally 



222 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

damn the entire people. The blood, too, as you also 
know, had to be that of a ram. Had the blood of a 
ewe, or of any other animal except a ram, been used, 
it would have possessed no sin-pardoning virtue, and, 
consequently, in this case, as in the other, the people 
would all have marched hellwards at once. Coming, 
as you pretend that it does, from an infinitely dig- 
nified God, this roast-beef-and-bloody-big-toe plan 
of salvation must of necessity be itself, like the- 
source whence it comes, infinitely perfect in dignity. 
But will you be so kind as to point out wherein con- 
sists this infinite perfection ? This wonderful plan 
of salvation was in use by your God before you 
adopted him — when he was the God of the Hebrews 
alone. When you adopted him, however, you had 
him abandon this comparatively harmless plan, and 
adopt the one which, from time immemorial, had 
been in use among your pagan ancestors — the 
unspeakably horrible plan which has him require his 
own innocent son to be butchered and offered to him 
as an atoning sacrifice, instead of the roast beef, the 
ram's blood, etc., of the old plan. This horrible 
plan, founded thus upon murder, and rendering, as it 
certainly does, cannibalism a necessity, is the one 
still in use throughout all Christendom. In a former 
course of lectures, entitled " Deity Analyzed," I have 
given this plan a full and fair investigation. 

And now, let me ask, what would you say of Spir- 
itualists should they seriously publish to the whole 
world a book filled with such disgusting balderdash 
about the blood of rams, the big toes of priests, etc., 
as that is which fills a large portion of the Bible ? 
Perhaps, however, you are so completely blinded by 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 223 

priestcraft that when reading these things in the 
Bible you are totally unable to see anything but in- 
finite dignity in all these ridiculous ceremonies. 
From your earliest childhood you have been so 
thoroughly stuffed with religious prejudices that you 
dare not bring your reason and your common sense 
to bear upon any portion of the contents of the 
Bible. Let us, therefore, change a few names in 
some of the verses which I have quoted, and suppose 
them, with these slight changes, to be the production 
of a spiritualistic writer. Then, perhaps, you will 
be able to see them in their true light. The change 
of names is not made in order to render the passages 
more ridiculous. No such change could possibly 
render them more ridiculous than they now are. As 
I have already intimated, the change is made simply 
because, upon pure scriptures, you could never bring 
your reason and common sense to bear : 

"And thou shalt gird them with girdles [Aaron 
Smith and his sons] and put the bonnets on them . . . 
And thou shalt cause a tom-cat to be brought before 
the hall of the Spiritualists ; and Aaron Smith and 
his sons shall put their feet upon the tail of the tom- 
cat. Then shalt thou kill the tom-cat, and take of 
his blood and put it upon the tip of the nose of 
Aaron Smith, and upon the tip of the nose of his 
sons, and upon the thumb of their right hand, and upon 
the great toe of their right foot. Also thou shalt 
take of the tom-cat the fat and the rump, and the fat 
that covereth the inwards, and the caul above the 
liver, and the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon 
them, and the tail : for it is a tom-cat of consecra- 
tion : and one pumpkin pie, and one buckwheat cake 



224 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

sopped in gravy, and one bologna sausage, and one 
hot loaf out of the bake oven." 

And now, how do you like this scripture when it is 
supposed to come from a Spiritualist ? Is it not just 
as full of dignity as is the original? To those who 
can, and who dare, think, no further comment is 
necessary. 

In the last six verses of the thirty-third chapter of 
Exodus we have a dialogue in which Moses asks to 
see your God's glory. Your God replies that his face 
is too glorious for a mortal to gaze upon — that no 
man can behold it and live. He says, however, that 
he is willing to show his " back parts," which, being 
far less glorious, can be seen with comparative safety. 
While getting ready to show the parts named, he 
holds his hand over the eyes of Moses, lest this clear- 
sighted old gentleman may get a glimpse of some 
more glorious parts. When all is ready he takes 
away his hand, and actually does make an indecent 
exposure of his nameless " back parts " to the de- 
lighted gaze of the morbidly curious, but wonderfully 
meek, old Moses. In this unspeakably disgusting 
exhibition of the most indecent portions of his body 
your God displayed his infinite dignity with a ven- 
geance. 

The custom of thus exhibiting only the "back 
parts " of gods, and of pretending that all their other 
parts are too glorious to be seen by men, was once 
quite general, and is said to still exist in Thibet, in 
Japan, and in some other countries. 

In the fourth chapter of Ezekiel we learn that this 
same God of yours required Ezekiel to lie down on 
his left side, in full view of the public, and, without 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 225 

turning over, to remain in that position for three 
hundred and ninety days. At the expiration of this 
time he was required to turn over and lie on his right 
side in the same spot for forty days. In order that 
he might be prepared to make a success of this won- 
derful stationary exploit he was required to lay in a 
sufficient quantity of provisions to last him during 
the entire time. In the ninth verse various ingre- 
dients are named which he was to use in making his 
bread, and in the twelfth verse we read : " And thou 
shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it 
with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight." 
Ezekiel, however, probably not having a very good 
appetite, complained that he was somewhat particular 
in regard to the kind of seasoning which he used in 
his food, and that the flavor of the article named was 
a little too strong to suit his fastidious taste. Your 
God, therefore, willing to humor his fastidious whim, 
says, in the fifteenth verse : " Lo, I have given thee 
cow's dung for man's dung, and thou shalt prepare 
thy bread therewith." This change seems to have 
exactly suited the taste of the famous old prophet. 
At any rate, he ate without further complaint the 
bread made according to your God's last recipe, so 
kindly given. 

And now, let me ask, can you point out any acts, 
or any teachings, of Spiritualists that equal, in want 
of dignity, these strange acts and teachings of your 
adopted God? Have Spiritualists of the male sex 
ever been so wanting in dignity as to engage in the 
trivial occupation of putting bonnets and petticoats 
upon one another ? Have Spiritualists ever been so 
wanting in dignity as to engage in the still more triv- 



226 OBJECTIONS TO SPIEITUALISM ANSWERED. 

ial and the totally unnecessary occupation of smear- 
ing one another's right ears, right thumbs, and right 
great toes, with the blood of rams ? Have they ever 
been so disgustingly wanting in dignity, and in 
decency, as to engage in the trivial, the shameful, 
occupation of lying down in public places, and 
remaining there, in the same position, wallowing in 
their own horrible filth, for more than a year at a 
time ? Have they ever been so wanting in dignity as 
to engage publicly and ostentatiously in the worse 
than trivial occupation of feasting upon the unutter- 
ably loathsome Ezekiel cake which has been de- 
scribed ? Finally, have they ever been so utterly 
lost to all sense of dignity and of decency as to engage 
in the abominable act of exhibiting their " back 
parts "to one another, or to the public? 

You cannot deny that your adopted God either did 
all these things himself, and a thousand more like 
them, or had them done by his favorite followers. 
"Would it not be well, then, for you to show a little 
more dignity in his character before you howl so 
loudly about the want of dignity in Spiritualism ? 
Do you require Spiritualists to be superior in dignity 
to your God himself ? You claim, however, that 
your God, since you adopted him, has quit all his 
absurd, his undignified, and his indecent ways. 
Very well. I am truly glad to hear of his much 
needed reformation. But how old was he when this 
reformation took place ? Should you not give Spir- 
itualists as much time in which to reform as you 
gave him? And, if he has thus changed, why do you 
teach that he is unchangeable ? 

A fourth objection often urged against Spiritualism 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 227 

is that it leads to infidelity. In reply to this charge 
I will say that it depends entirely upon what you 
mean by the term infidelity. If you mean atheism, 
then the charge is utterly false. Spiritualism has 
nothing to do with theology, and a great majority of 
Spiritualists are believers in the existence of some 
such being as your adopted God. It is true that 
many Spiritualists are atheists. Spiritualism, how- 
ever, had nothing to do in making them so. As well 
might you argue that agriculture, the mechanical 
arts, etc., lead to atheism, as to argue that Spiritual- 
ism has a tendency to do this. Spiritualism, indeed, 
has an exactly opposite tendency. By demonstrating 
that finite spirits do exist it renders more easy the 
belief that an infinite spirit may exist. Show me 
one atheist who has become such since embracing 
Spiritualism, and I will show you a hundred who 
have become such in the Christian church, or at 
least under, its influences. I am a thorough atheist 
myself, but I became such while laboring faithfully 
as an orthodox minister of the gospel, fourteen years 
before I began the investigation of Spiritualism. 
With all my intense devotion I found it utterly im- 
possible for me to love, to respect, or even to believe 
in the existence of so jealous, so cruel, so unjust, so 
undignified, and so indecent a being as the Bible 
represents your adopted God as having formerly 
been. For many years — years of unutterable dark- 
ness and despair — I did my best, but in vain, to be- 
lieve in this monstrous being. I finally came to the 
conclusion, to which nearly all honest investigators 
sooner or later come, that your God, like all other 
gods, is simply an invention with which priests man- 



228 OBJECTIONS TO SPIKITUALISM ANSWEEED. 

age to keep the ignorant and superstitious masses in 
subjection. 

If, however, by the term infidelity you mean the 
manly use of our reason and our common sense, un- 
terrified by priestly denunciations, and absurd creeds, 
then I freely admit that nearly all Spiritualists 
are, to a greater or a less extent, tinctured with 
infidelity. They undeniably do, as a class, rank very 
high as free thinkers and correct reasoners. It is 
not so much the embracing of Spiritualism, however, 
that leads men to become free thinkers and correct 
reasoners, as it is the exercising of free thought and 
correct reasoning that leads them to embrace Spirit- 
ualism. Persons who either cannot, or dare not, 
think for themselves, never become either Spiritual- 
ists or infidels. Such persons, on faith alone, piously 
swallow down whatever their priests may see fit to 
put into their mouths, and, as a natural consequence 
of such pious compliance, they nearly always die firm 
believers in the religion with which they happen to 
have been stuffed, no matter how absurd or degrading 
that religion may be. For obvious reasons such per- 
sons never make any progress. Indeed, founded as 
it is upon an unchangeable God, and upon an un- 
changeable book, Christianity itself, if unperverted, 
is, of necessity, totally incapable of change, of prog- 
ress, or of improvement. By binding upon us the 
doctrines of the ancients, by requiring us to worship 
their system or family of gods, and by holding up 
their characters and their lives as sacred models for 
our imitation, it necessarily tends entirely to retro- 
gression. It necessarily tends to lead us back into 
the darkness, the ignorance, the superstition of the 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 229 

gloomy past, and to shut out the light, the learning, 
and the mental freedom of the brighter present. 
Denouncing as the most damnable infidelity all 
rejections of its doctrines, or of its models, all de- 
partures from them, and all advances beyond them, 
it necessarily tends to keep alive among us the foul 
principles of slavery, of bigotry, of cruelty, of polyg- 
amy, of concubinage, etc., which constitute the most 
prominent characteristics of its principal God and of 
its most noted models. It claims that, in thus lead- 
ing us back into the customs of the times in which 
these principles prevailed, it is leading us into the 
simplicity and the innocence with which God is best 
pleased. It teaches that the farther we go back into 
the misty distance of the past, the nearer to God we 
find the people, and that the more we progress, the 
more we differ from those people, the farther we de- 
part from God, and from the hope of salvation. 

All this, as you must plainly perceive, is bound to 
render the Christian religion the most formidable of 
all enemies to every form of progress and improve- 
ment. And does not the whole history of its course 
prove that this view is correct ? For ten centuries 
it had full sway over the fairest portions of earth ; 
and because of the universal prevalence of ignorance, 
of crime, and of wretchedness during their continu- 
ance, those ten centuries constitute what are called 
the " Dark Ages." And what was it that dissipated 
the darkness of those ages? Certainly not the 
Christian religion. Darkness could never be dissi- 
pated by the same cause that produced it. The 
Christian Church, with desperate tenacity, clung to 
that darkness as her own most precious property — - 



230 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

as the only condition under which she conld fully 
flourish. She regarded every attack made upon that 
Idarkness as an attack made upon herself. She 
(denounced science as infidelity, and burned scientists 
as infidels. It was only after her power was partially 
broken by internal dissensions that infidel science 
was enabled to terminate that thousand years of 
darkness — that millennium of the Christian Religion. 
Every historian knows that what I say is true — that 
all progress in the useful sciences has been made, 
not by the Church, but in spite of her most bitter 
and persistent opposition. 

A fifth objection to Spiritualism, and the only one 
that now remains to be noticed, is that its tendencies 
are of an immoral nature — that it leads especially 
to what is commonly, though incorrectly, called free- 
love ; the promiscuous and degrading intercourse 
with each other of the two sexes. This charge is 
usually made in so malicious a spirit, and with so 
utter a disregard for truth, that, were I not a minis- 
ter of the gospel and opposed to profanity, I should 
feel myself impelled to brand it as a d — d lie ! As it is, 
I will merely say that it contains not even a shadow 
of truth. How can it ? Does the presence in this life 
of those who are dearest to us — of our mothers, our 
sisters, our wives, our daughters of all who are 
good and pure around us, lead us into immoral hab- 
its ? Does not their presence tend to preserve us 
from vice ? Does it not tend to make us more pure, 
more like they are ? When their loving voices are 
forever hushed on earth, when their once brilliant 
eyes have grown sightless and dim, when their dulled 
ears have ceased to hear our words of endearment, 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIEITUALISM ANSWEKED. 231 

when their warm hearts have grown motionless and 
cold, when their icy hands have been crossed upon 
their pulseless bosoms, when their pale and lifeless 
forms have been laid to rest in the damp and silent 
abodes of the dead, and when we have returned to 
weep in our desolated homes, does the sacred memory 
of those loved ones, thus lost forever to us on earth, 
does the fond hope of meeting them in a land of 
light, in homes of fadeless beauty and nameless 
bliss— do all these things tend to render us degraded in 
our natures and immoral in our habits ? And when 
years have passed, when age is coming on us apace, 
when long-continued grief and intense yearning for 
our dear ones so long departed have aroused our 
spiritual senses to action ; when we again hear their 
well-remembered voices ; when, with joy unspeak- 
able, we gaze on their love-lit faces and their robes 
of light, when we hear them tell how fondly they are 
waiting for us to join them in their lands of beauty 
and their homes of bliss, can all these things tend to 
lead us into the practice of immoral habits? As 
well might you teach that the great ocean is the 
source of dryness, that the glorious sun is the 
source of darkness, and that heaven itself is the 
source of wickedness. If our visitants from heaven 
lead us astray, how full of sin must heaven itself 
be! 

You assert, however, that many persons who pro- 
fess to believe in Spiritualism do lead immoral lives. 
.Very well. I admit the truth of your assertion, 
though I do not admit that Spiritualism is in any 
way responsible for that immorality. How can 
Spiritualism be responsible for anything which does 



232 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

not and which can not result from its teachings ? I 
can point out a hundred times as many equally im- 
moral persons who profess to believe in the Christian 
religion. But do you hold Christianity responsible 
for their immorality ? 

Spiritualism simply teaches that our spirit friends 
can and do communicate with us who are still in the 
body. Beyond a belief in this doctrine, it has noth- 
ing to do with either the opinions or the practices of 
men. The consequence is that Spiritualists are of 
all shades of opinion in regard to other doctrines, 
and of all grades of morality. If a simple belief in 
the presence of our spirit friends can not lead us 
into immoral habits, then Spiritualism stands fully 
vindicated from the foul charge which you have 
brought against it. Upon this vindication I might 
safely rest my case. Being an old soldier, however, 
I am not in the habit' of receiving a shot without 
giving one in return. I propose, therefore, to consider 
the standing of your party in regard to morality. 

In the first place, then, let me ask, do you find 
immorality prevailing among those who have been 
reared up entirely under the influences of Spiritual- 
ism — among those who have never been tampered 
with by the advocates of the Christian religion? 
Do you not, on the contrary, usually find these per- 
sons, few though they be, distinguished for the purity 
of their morals ? - Who are those Spiritualists with 
whose immorality you are so greatly offended ? Can 
you, among them all, point out any who have not 
been members of some branch of the Christian 
Church, or who have not, at least, been reared up 
under church influences? Do you not uniformly find 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 233 

that these persons formed their immoral habits 
before they embraced Spiritualism ? Do you not also 
find nearly every form of their immorality stamped 
with the trademark of the Church? In charging 
Spiritualism with immorality, you are like the skunk 
that first sprinkled some of his own perfumery upon 
a lion, and then, turning up his nose, as if in great 
disgust, asked the lion what made him stink. I shall 
not waste time, however, attacking the vices which 
prevail among the members of the various churches. 
As usual, I shall go at once to the Bible and its God, 
and see what they teach us in regard to morality. 

In my last lecture I proved that, whenever it seemed 
to be to his interest to do so, the God of the Bible 
unhesitatingly resorted to deception, to promise- 
breaking, etc. I now propose to prove that he also 
encouraged, and sometimes even enforced, the prac- 
tice of polygamy, of concubinage, and of many other 
customs which you would justly condemn as shock- 
ingly immoral if they were encouraged by the advo- 
cates of Spiritualism. 

In 2 Sam. v, 13, we read : " And David took him 
more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after 
he was come from Hebron." Previous to this time, 
as we learn elsewhere, he had a goodly number of 
those beautiful blessings, and yet, in addition to all 
of these, and to all of those whom I have just men- 
tioned as being taken by him soon after his arrival 
in Jerusalem, God made him a present of a whole 
houseful at once of beautiful women. This fact we 
learn from 2 Sam. xii, 8, in which we read : " And I 
gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives 
into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel 



234 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

and of Judah, and if that had been too little, I would 
moreover have given unto thee such and such things." 
The women given to David on this occasion were the 
widows of Saul, who was one of David's fathers-in- 
law. The women, therefore, were all mothers-in-law 
to David, until he went in unto them, and by so 
doing made them his wives. Probably God intended, 
by means of this transaction, to teach men the proper 
method of disposing of mothers-in-law. Be this as 
it may, however, .he certainly did intend to show to 
the world that he was emphatically in favor of the 
practice of polygamy and concubinage t among his 
followers, and that he was willing to give them any 
reasonable aid in the carrying out of this practice. 
David was the king, the head of the nation and of 
the church, and the acknowledged favorite of God. 
This great man's example, therefore, in this matter, 
as well as in all others — except the single affair of 
Uriah's wife — was, by God's public and unqualified 
approval, made the highest model for the imitation 
of the people. As might have been expected, the 
God-approved example of this illustrious man gave a 
wonderful impetus to the practice* of polygamy and 
concubinage. Indeed, from that time onward, for 
many generations, men, among the Jews, seem to 
have been honored and envied in direct proportion 
to the number of their wives and concubines. 

If you only dared to do so you would promptly 
deny that God ever did express an unqualified 
approval of David's polygamy and other immoral 
practices. Such a denial, however, is rendered im- 
possible by 1 Kings xv, 5, in which we read : "Be- 
cause David did that which was right in the eyes of 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 235 

the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that 
he commanded him all the days of his life, save only 
in the matter of Uriah the Hittite." As things 
" right in the eyes of the Lord," this certainly includes 
David's degrading practices of polygamy, of concu- 
binage, of lying, etc., as well as his horrible crimes 
of maiming horses, by houghing them, and of delib- 
erately murdering the innocent women and children 
of his benefactors, by tearing them to pieces with 
saws and harrows, by smothering them in brick- 
kilns, etc. 

And now, let me ask, if all these things were " right 
in the eyes of the Lord," as they certainly were, 
when performed by David, his favorite, can they be 
wrong in his eyes now, when they are performed by 
holy men, in imitation of his model man, David ? If 
these things were ever " right in the eyes of the 
Lord," can they be otherwise than right in his eyes 
now ? Does he ever change his opinions in regard to 
what is right and what is wrong ? And can he err in 
regard to these matters ? If he never errs, and never 
changes his opinions, are not all those things which 
ever were right in his sight bound to be right. now, 
not only in his sight, but in reality ? And can a 
belief in such a God have any other tendency than 
that of perverting men's moral natures ? Will not 
men naturally incline to be like the God they wor- 
ship? "Will their morality ever be of a higher type 
than is his ? And, in teaching men to worship a God 
who favors polygamy, concubinage, and other degrad- 
ing and criminal practices — in holding up, as models 
of Godliness for the imitation of all men, the Abra- 
hams, the Jacobs, the Moseses, the Davids — the 



236 OBJECTIONS TO SPIKITUALISM ANSWEEED. 

characters most notorious for polygamy, for concu- 
binage, for lying, for treachery, for robbery, for 
murder, etc., is not the Bible bound to be a pernicious 
book, and Christianity a dangerous religion ? 

Not only did this adopted God of yours, in more 
ways than one, place his seal of unqualified approba- 
tion upon polygamy, concubinage, lying, and other 
vices, practiced by his chosen people, but he also 
compelled men, under certain circumstances, to prac- 
tice them. In Deut. xxv, 5, 6, we read : "If brethren 
dwell together, and one of them die and leave no 
child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without 
unto a stranger ; her husband's brother shall go in 
unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform 
the duty of an husband's brother unto her. And it 
shall be that the first-born which she beareth shall 
succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, 
that his name be not put out of Israel." If the de- 
ceased husband had no brother, his nearest male 
kinsman, whether married or single, had to go in 
unto the widow, and raise up seed unto her deceased 
husband. If there were many brothers, and all of 
them but one died, leaving wives but no children, the 
remaining brother, no matter how many wives he 
might already have, was bound to take, for wives or 
concubines, all his widowed sisters-in-law, and by 
them raise up seed to all his deceased brothers. 
This compulsory form of polygamy and concubinage, 
involving no love or preference on either side, 
enforced even in cases in which the parties to it 
regarded each other with absolute loathing, and hav- 
ing reference to nothing except breeding, as among 
cattle, was the most degrading of all forms of those 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIKITUALISM ANSWERED. 237 

abominable practices. And yet this form of brutish 
breeding was so pleasing to the eyes of your God 
that he compelled men to practice it. 

In the thirty-first chapter of Numbers we have an 
account of the destruction of the Midianites' by an 
army of Hebrews that Moses, acting under your 
God's command, had sent out for that purpose. The 
men of Midian were all slain, but the women and 
children were all brought in alive as captives. When 
the victorious army of the Hebrews, with their cap- 
tives and other spoils, drew near, Moses and the 
other principal men of Israel went forth to meet 
them. Then, as we learn from the fourteenth to 
eighteenth verses, " Moses was wroth with the offi- 
cers of the host, with the captains over thousands 
and the captains over hundreds, which came from 
the battle. And Moses said unto them, Have ye 
saved all the women alive ? . . . Now, therefore, 
kill every male among the little ones, and kill every 
woman that hath known man by lying with him. 
But all the women children that have not known a 
man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves." 
These horrible orders were immediately executed. 

And now, let me ask, what would you think of 
your God's conduct should he conclude to have us 
all slain, our houses all pillaged and burned, our 
wives, our mothers, our married sisters, and our 
married daughters, together with our little boys, all 
butchered in cold blood, while our virgin daughters 
and our virgin sisters were divided out to sate the 
brutal lust of the inhuman butchers whom he had 
chosen as his special favorites ? Would he, for such 
horrible deeds, merit the praises of all men ? And 



238 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

yet would lie act any worse in treating us and our 
loved ones in this way than he did act when he 
treated the Midianites and their families in the same 
way ? For no crime but that of being males, he had 
those poor little babes torn from the arms of their 
fond mothers, and their heads crushed by the tens 
of thousands at once. For no other crime than that 
of being wives and mothers, he had an immense mul- 
tiude of poor, helpless women butchered in cold 
blood. Finally, for no other crime than that of being 
virgins, destitute of protectors, he divided out 32,000 
young girls to be outraged by the brutal soldiery, 
and the equally brutal priests and other holy men. As 
for me, I can neither love nor serve such a God. In 
a published poem, " The Devil's Defense," I have 
given a vivid description of this and other unutter- 
ably horrid scenes enacted by your God's express 
command : 

" The Lord is a man of war, 'tis said, 
' A fierce, a consuming fire ;' 
And countless hosts of the ghastly dead 

Bear proof of his terrible ire. 
He doth not pity, he doth not spare, 

He cruelly doth destroy ; 
He doth not care for the wailing prayer ; — 

To him 'tis a source of joy. 
He ordereth his band, with a bloody hand, 

To butcher both young and old — 
To render the land like a waste of sand 
Where the billows once have rolled. 
They haste to obey what their Lord doth command; 
Like devils incarnate, they waste the whole land. 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 239 

Alas ! for their victims ! wherever they turn, 
Destruction awaits, while their villages burn. 
Dense volumes of smoke, like a vast floating pall, 
Hang dark o'er the valley, the mountain, and all. 
From the depths of their darkness arise on the air 
Such yells of fierce rage, and such screams of de- 
spair, 
That even the raving of devils in hell 
Could never this scene, in its horrors, excel. 
By legions the bravest defenders are slain, 
Their bodies lie scattered all over the plain ; 
The few who survive them, like lions at bay, 
Now turn on their murd'rers ; they yell and they slay ; 
But, beaten by numbers, their eyes gleaming fire, 
They scream their defiance, they fall, they expire. 
Of the strong and the brave, the last one is now 

dead, 
And to those who are helpless the carnage is 

spread ; — 
There burst forth anew on the smoke-burdened air 
More terrible wailings of utter despair ; 
Old women, whose locks are as white as the snow, 
Are butchered and left to be food for the crow ; 
The poor mothers flee with their babes at the 

breast ; 
Oh ! could they save these, they'd endure all the rest ; 
But your God's servants meet them, then round them 

there rains 
A shower of blood mixed with their babies' crushed 

brains. 
Oh! horrible! horrible! maddening sight ! 
'Twould touch e'en the hearts of the demons of 

night. 



240 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

But pity— no pity God's minions do feel, 
While mangling those poor little babies with steel. 
The fond mothers cling to the bodies yet hot, 
They gaze in the eyes, but are recognized not. 
The lips that so lately were wreathed in a smile, 
All mangled and gory, still quiver a while ; 
Death's pallor creeps over each sweet little face, 
The heart becomes still, and the eyes glaze apace. 
The mothers see this, and are now glad to die ; 
They struggle no longer, no longer they cry ; 
Their throats are now cut, and their blood, like a 

spout, 
On their babies' dead faces, comes gushing right out ; 
Their bodies, unburied, encumber the sod, 
And this all done by your orthodox God." 

If it were only in your power to do so, how gladly 
would you deny that your God was ever guilty of 
murders so unutterably foul ! This denial, however, 
you cannot possibly make. The Bible is too explicit 
on the subject. It is too explicit also in regard to 
the purpose for which the virgin girls were preserved 
alive. That purpose was one of the foulest of which 
the human mind can conceive, and yet that purpose 
was approved by your God. Those pure young girls 
were preserved for the sole purpose of being out- 
raged by the brutal murderers of their parents, of 
their baby brothers, of all their loved ones. The 
language does not admit of any other interpretation. 
If, as you would like to have it appear, those girls 
were spared for servants, why were the boys all 
slain ? Would not these have made better servants, 
especially for the soldiers ? And why were all the 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 241 

women slain who had ever been married ? "Would 
the fact that they had been wives have rendered them 
any the less valuable as servants ? The case is too 
plain to require further argument. For sexual pur- 
poses alone would the notoriously libidinous Hebrews 
have been so careful to spare none but women who 
had never been denied by the touch of idolatrous 
men. And, admitting that those young women were 
preserved ostensibly for servants, how much better 
does it render the case ? To what use did Abraham, 
Jacob, and all the other Hebrews, so far as we know, 
put their female servants ? What were their female 
servants, as a rule, but concubines ? In this case, 
there were only 12,000 soldiers, and yet they received 
16,000 young women. This would give one woman 
to each private, and at least a dozen to each officer. 
And do you pretend that the soldiers and officers 
had need of so many women as ordinary servants ? 
In any view of the case, how revolting to every sense 
of modesty was the examination which, through his 
agent Moses, your God required the soldiers to make 
of the women, in order to ascertain which ones 
of them had, and which ones had not, " known a 
man by lying with him ?" How would our good 
orthodox women of the present time like it if their 
God should conclude to have them treated in that 
same manner? Would they still shout his praises ? 
If not, why do you shout his praises at all ? Is he 
not just as guilty now as he would be in that case ? 
In what respect would it be worse for him to have 
our own women thus outraged, than it was to have 
the same things done to the women of Midian ? 
In Hosea i, 2, 3, we read : " And the Lord said to 



242 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms, and 
children of whoredoms : ... So he went and 
took Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim ; which con- 
ceived and bare him a son." Further on, we learn 
that she bore him two other children ; that he then 
grew tired of her, called her by foul names, threat- 
ened to strip her naked in the streets, etc. In ii, 2-4, 
we read : " Plead with your mother, plead ; for she 
is not my wife, neither am I her husband : . . . 
And I will not have mercy upon her children ; for 
they be the children of whoredoms." These were 
his own children by Gomer, the lewd woman, with 
whom, by your God's orders, he had been cohabiting 
without even a pretense of marriage. 

Having driven Gomer and her children from him, 
this holy man was prepared to serve the Lord in the 
bed of another woman of the same character. This 
we learn from iii, 1-3, in which we read : " Then said 
the Lord unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of 
her friend, yet an adulteress. ... So I bought 
her to me for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an 
homer of barley, and an half homer of barley. And I 
said unto her, Thou shalt abide for me many days ; 
thou shalt not play the harlot, and thou shalt not be 
for another man : so will I also be for thee." With 
what refreshing simplicity this godly old rake tells 
us how much he paid as fees to this prostitute, and 
that, by paying in advance, he had her all to himself 
for " many days !" When about to engage in similar 
enterprises, the holy men of our own time would do 
well to follow Hosea's prudent example. 

And now, how do you like your adopted God's mo- 
rality as exhibited in his repeated instructions to his 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 243 

beloved Hosea ? Should you blame the holy men of 
the present time who attempt to follow the godly 
example of men so righteous and so favored of God 
as were Abraham, Jacob, David, Hosea, and others ? 
Are not the lives and the characters of these holy 
men of the Bible given to us as models ? If so, 
should we not imitate them? Did not your God 
beget his only son upon an unmarried woman ? And 
are we to condemn or to imitate your God's example ? 
These are only a few of a vast number of examples 
which I could give, all of which go to show a similar 
state of morals on the part of your adopted God, and 
of those who, as models for the world, were acting 
directly under his instructions. 

And now, in conclusion, let me ask, how can such 
teachings, how can such models, be otherwise than 
degrading in their influence upon the moral natures 
of those who accept them as coming from God him- 
self ? You teach that this God is utterly unchange- 
able. Admitting that he is so, is he not bound to see 
polygamy, concubinage, etc., in the same light to-day 
as that in which he saw them when he was engaged 
in encouraging, aiding, and even compelling his cho- 
sen people to practice them ? According to his own 
declaration, these practices were then right in his 
sight. How, then, without a change on his part, 
must they appear in his sight to-day ? 

You also teach that all your morality comes from 
this unchangeable God, as its fountain head. And 
can a stream rise above its source ? Can your mo- 
rality ever become of a higher type than is that of 
the God from whom you derive it ? Can your mo- 
rality ever become of a higher type than was that of 



244 OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 

your Bible models, Abraham, Jacob, Hosea, and 
others ?. Dare you say that you are better than were 
these men ? Did they not live farther up the stream, 
nearer to God, the source, than do you ? If, then, 
your lives be any purer than were the lives of David, 
Hosea, and other holy men of the Bible, does not 
that greater purity come from your getting farther 
away from the God of the Bible ? 

Finally, are polygamy, concubinage, deception, the 
butchering of infants, etc., right, or are they wrong ? 
They are bound to be the one or the other. If you 
say that they are right, what kind of morality do you 
teach ? If you say that they are wrong, what kind 
of a character do you give to your God who favored 
these things, and often compelled men to practice 
them ? Has your God reformed, and become better 
than he was then ? If so, when did he reform, and 
why do you teach that he is unchangeable ? You 
delight to harp upon the purer morality said to have 
been taught and practiced by Jesus. These harpings, 
however, can be of no possible service to you in the 
present discussion. I have not a word to say against 
the morality imputed to Jesus ; but what was he — a 
God or a man ? If a God, was he not this same God ? 
And could he be any better than himself? You may 
say that he was only God's son, and not God himself. 
Very well. Then we have two distinct Gods — the 
Father and the Son. But dare you say that the Son 
was any better than the Father ? If not, what have 
you gained by bringing the Son into the discussion ? 
If Jesus was only a man, dare you say that he taught 
and practiced a purer morality than did God himself ? 
Escape these dilemmas, answer these arguments, and 



OBJECTIONS TO SPIRITUALISM ANSWERED. 245 

then, with much better grace, you can attack the glo- 
rious doctrines of Spiritualism. With these remarks, 
my arguments close. 

And now, in conclusion, I will say that when I was 
entering upon the preparation of this course of lect- 
ures, I was well aware that I was entering upon a 
work which would inevitably bring upon me the 
unrelenting persecutions of the mighty armies of 
so-called orthodox theology. Believing, however, 
that the work was a great and good one, I was willing 
to bear the persecutions which I knew it would briug 
upon me. I have borne them, and still continue to 
bear them. They move me not. "Why should they ? 
I am growing old. Years, and toils, and sorrows are 
deepening the furrows on my face, and the silver 
hairs are fast crowding the black from my temples. 
The sun of my life has long since passed its zenith, and 
is now fast hastening adown to the western horizon. 
My lengthening shadow now falls entirely behind me. 
Before me, over the great ocean of futurity, all things 
lie enwrapped in the glorious radiance of living light. 
My journey is almost ended ; my work is almost done. 
Soon to the land of the leal will I go, to join my 
spirit friends, my parents, my sisters, my children, 
my loved ones all, who have waited for me so long, 
and who, as ministering angels, sometimes come to 
me, even now, in their robes of snow, on their wings 
of light. By far the greater portion of those I have 
loved have already reached the farther shore of the 
mystic river, and are dwelling amid the untold beau- 
ties of the spirits' Summer-land. Let the change 
called death, then, come when it may ; I am ready ; 
and, as I have lived, so will I die — a man. 



COL. JOHN R. KELSO'S WORKS, 

THE BIBLE ANALYZED. 

Cloth, octavo, 833 pages, $3.00 

DEITY ANALYZED AND THE 
DEVIL'S DEFENSE. 

Cloth, 12mo., 466 pages, ----- $1.50 

THE REAL BLASPHEMERS. 

Paper, 12mo, 138 pages, ----- .50c. 

SPIRITUALISM SUSTAINED. 

Cloth, 12mo, 245 pages, - $ 1.00. 

TRUTH SEEKER OFFICE, 33 Clinton Place, New York. 



WORKS BY J. E. REMSBURG. 

False Claims. Ee vised and Enlarged. As a Missionary 
Document it is unexcelled. Among the subjects considered 
by Mr. Remsburg are: The Church and Morality; Criminal 
Statistics, showing the creeds of the prisoners in the peniten- 
tiaries; the Church and Civilization; the Church and Sci- 
ence; the Church and Learning; the Church and Liberty-, 
the Church and the Antislavery Reform; the Woman's 
Rights Movement; the Temperance Reform; the Church and 
the Republic. Price, 10 cents singly; 75 cents per dozen. 

Bible Morals. Twenty Crimes and Yices Sanctioned by 
Scripture; Falsehood and Deception; Cheating; Theft and 
Robbery; Adultery and Prostitution ; Murder; Wars of Con- 
quest and Extermination ; Despotism ; Intolerance and Per- 
secution; Injustice to Woman; Unkindness to Children; 
Cruelty to Animals ; Human Sacrifices; Cannibalism ; Witch- 
craft; Slavery; Polygamy; Intemperance; Poverty and Va- 
grancy; Ignorance and Idiocy; Obscenity. Price, single 
copies, 25 cents ; 6 copies, $1. Special discount on larger 
quantities. 

Sabbath-BreaMng. This is the best and most thorough 
work ever written on the Sabbath from a rational point of 
view. Large and handsome print. The question is dis- 
cussed under the following heads: Origin of the Sabbatic 
Idea; the Jewish Sabbath; the Christian Scriptures and the 
Sabbath; Examination of Sunday Arguments; Origin of 
Christian Sabbath; Testimony of the Christian Fathers; the 
Sabbath during the Middle Ages; the Puritan Sabbath; 
Testimony of Christian Reformers, Scholars, and Divines; 
Abrogation of Sunday Laws. Price, 25 cents ; six copies, $1. 

Image Breaker. Six Lectures: Decline of Faith, 
Protestant Intolerance, Washington an Unbeliever ; Jefferson 
an Unbeliever ; Paine and Wesley ; Christian Sabbath. 
Each 5 cents ,• bound, paper, 25 cents ; per doz. 40 cents. 

Thomas Paine. Tells the story of the Author-Hero's 
life, delineates the leading traits of his character and genius, 
and vindicates his name from the aspersions cast upon it. 
Choice extracts from " Common Sense," " American Crisis," 
"Rights of Man," and '-Age of Reason," are given; also, 
tributes to Paine's character from nv >re than one hundred 
noted persons of Europe and America many of them written 
expressly for this work. Second edition, 160 pages, printed 
on fine tinted paper, neatly bound, and containing a hand- 
some steel portrait of Paine. Paper, 50 cts ; cloth, 75 cts. 

The Apostle of Liberty. An address delivered in 
Paine Hall, before the N. E. Freethinkers' Convention, Jan- 
uary 29, 1884. Price, 10 cents. 
For all the above works address THE TRUTH SEEKER CO., 

33 Clinton Place, New York. 



TRUTH SEEKER CO.'S PUBLICATIONS. 



PAINE'S WORKS. 
Paine's Theological Works, including The Age of 

Reason, Examination of Prophecies, Letter to the Bishop of 
Llandaff, Reply to Mr. Erskine, Letter to Camille Jordan, etc., 
etc., with a life of Paine and a steel-plate portrait. 12mo. 
In paper covers, $1; cloth, $1.50. 

Paine's Great Works (complete) in one volume. Cloth, 

$3.00; leather, $4.00; morocco, $4.50. 

Paine's Political Works, including Common Sense, 

The Crisis, and Eights of Man. Cloth, $1.50. 

The Age of Reason. An investigation of true and fabu- 
lous theology. Without a peer in the world. Paper, 25 cents, 
or 5 for $1. Cloth, 50 cents. 

The Age of Eeason and An Examination of the 
Prophecies. Paper, 40 cents; Cloth, 75 cents. 

Common Sense. Paine's first work. 15 cents. 

The Crisis. Containing numbers from I. to XVL inchi' 

sive. Paper, 40 cents; cloth, 75 cents. 

The Rights of Man. For the oppressed of humanity. 
Paper, 40; cloth, 75 cents. 

Paine's Life, with Remarks on Comte and Rousseau, 
By Calvin Blanchabd. Paper, 50 cents; cloth, 75 cents. 



B. F. UNDERWOOD'S WORKS. 

Essays and Lectures. Embracing Influence of Chris- 
tianity on Civilization ; Christianity and Materialism ; What Lib- 
eralism offers in Place of Christianity; Scientific Materialism; 
Woman; Spiritualism from a Materialistic Standpoint; Paine 
the Political and Religious Reformer; Materialism and Crime; 
Will the Coming Man Worship God? Crimes and Cruelties oi 
Christianity; the Authority of the Bible; Freethought Judged 
by its Fruits; Our Ideas of God. 300 pp., paper, 60 cents,* 
cloth, $1. 

Influence of Christianity npon Cmlization. 25 cents. 
Christianity and Materialism. 15 cents. 



6 TRUTH SEEKER CO.'S PUBLICATIONS. 

What Liberalism Offers in Place of Christianity. 

10 cents. 

Scientific Materialism: Its Meaning and Tendency. 

10 cents. 

Spiritualism from a Materialistic Standpoint. 10 

cents. 

Paine the Political and Religious Reformer. 10 cents. 

Woman: Her Past and Present: Her Rights and 
Wrongs. 10 cents. 

Materialism and Crime. 10 cents. 

Will the Coming Man Worship God? 10 cents. 

Crimes and Cruelties of Christianity. 10 cents. 

Twelve Tracts. Scientific and Theological. 20 cents. 

Burgess-Underwood Debate. A four day's debate be- 
tween B. F. Undebwood and Prof. O. A. Buegess, President 
of the Northwestern Christian University, Indianapolis, Ind. 
Accurately reported. 188 pp. Paper, 50 cents; cloth, 80 cents. 

IJnderwood-Marples Debate. A four nights' debate 

between B. F. Undebwood and Rev. John Mabples. Fully 
reported. Paper, 35 cents; cloth, 60 cents. 



MISCELLANEOUS 

Freethought Works Published by D. M. Bennett. 

A Business Man's Social and Religious Yiews. Bold 

and trenchant blows againsts theology and inhumanity. $1. 

Advancement of Science. The Inaugural Address of 
Prof. John Tyndatj, delivered before the British Association 
for the Advancement of Science. With Portrait and Biograph- 
ical sketch. Also containing opinions of Prof. H. Helm- 
holtz and articles of Prof. Ttndall, and Sir Henby Thompson 
on prayer. Price, cloth, 50 cents; paper, 25 cents. Inaugural 
Address alone, in paper, 10 ceDts. 

Alamontada the GaHey-Slaye. Translated from the 

German of Zschokke by Iba G. Mosheb, L.L.B. A deeply 

?»hilosophical narrative, intensely interesting. Prioe, <alotb, 
5 cents; paper, 50 cents. 



TRUTH SEEKER CO.'S PUBLICATIONS. 1 

Amberley's Life of Jesus. His character and doctrins. 

From the Analysis of Religious Belief. By Viscount Ambeb- 
lbt. Paper, 35 cents; cloth, 60 cents. 

Beyond the Teil. Claimed to be dictated by the spirit 
of Paschal Beverly Randolph, aided by Emanuel Swedenborg, 
through the mediumship of Mrs. Frances H. McDougall and 
Mrs. Luna Hutchinson, with a steel engraving of Randolph. 
$1.50 

Blakeman's 200 Poetical Riddles. 20 cents. 
Career of Religious Ideas; Their Ultimate the Keligion 

of Science. By Hudson Tuttle. Paper, 50 cents; cloth, 75 
cents. 

Chronicles of Simon Christianus. His manifold and 

wonderful adventures in the Land of Cosmos. A new scrip- 
ture (evidently inspired) discovered by I. N. Fidel. From 
the English. Very rich. 25 cents. 

Crimes of Preachers in the United States. By M, E. 

Billings. Shows how thick and fast the godly have fallen from 
grace. Price, 25 cents. 

Deity Analyzed and the Devil's Defense. In Six 

Lectures by Col. John E. Kelso, A.M. These are among the 
ablest lectures ever delivered, and should be read by every- 
body. Price, $1.50. 

Ecce Diaoolus; or, The Worship of Yahyeh or Jeho- 
vah shown to be the Worship of the Devil, with 
observations on the horrible and cruel ordinance of Devil 
Worship, to wit, Bloody Sacrifices and Burnt Offerings. By 
the Very Kev. Evan Davies (Myfyr Morganwg), D.D., L.L.D., 
Arch-Druid of Great Britain. Translated from the Welsh by 
Morion, B. C. Price, 25 cents. 

Eight Scientific Tracts. 20 cents. 

Gottlieb: His Life. A Eomance of earth, heaven, and 
hell. Beautifully written, by S. P. Putnam. 25 cents. 

Hereafter. A scientific, phenomenal, and biblical dem- 
onstration of a future life. By D. W. Hull. Paper, 50 cents; 
cloth, 75 cents. 

Issnes of the Age. Consequences involved in modem 
thought. A work showing much study and great familiarity 
with other writers and thinkers. By Hknbi C. Pkddbb. 
Price $1. 



tf TRUTH SEEKER CO.'S PUBLICATIONS. 

Jesus Christ. His life, miracles, deity, teachings, and 
imperfections. By W. S. Bell. 25 cents. 

John's Way. A pleasing domestic Eadical story. By 
By Mrs. E. D. Slenkeb. 15 cents. 

Last Will and Testament of Jean Meslier, a curate of 

a Eoman church in France, containing the best of his writings. 
25 cents. 

Nathaniel Yaughan. A radical novel of marked abil- 
ity. By Fredeeika Macdonald. 404 pages. Price reduced 
to $1.25. 

Nature's Revelations of Character; or Physiognomy 
Illustrated. The science of individual traits por- 
trayed by the temperaments and features. Illustrated by 260 
wood cuts. By Joseph Simms, M.D. 650 pages, 8vo. Cloth, 
$3.00; leather, $4.00; morocco, gilt edges, $4.50. 

New England and the People up There. A humorous 

Lecture. By George E. Macdonald. 10 cents. 

Outline of the French Revolution: Its Causes and 
Results. A clear and comprehensive portrayal of 
this interesting portion of human history. By W. S. Bell. 
25 cents. 

Outlines of Phrenology. By F. E. Aspinwall, M.D. 

Most acceptable to Liberals of anything of the kind published. 
Paper, 50 cents; cloth, 75 cents. 

Pocket Theology. By Yoltaike. Comprising terse, wit- 
ty, and sarcastic definitions of the terms used in theology. 
The only edition in English. 25 cents. 

Proceedings and Adresses at the Watkins Conven- 
tion. 400 pages of excellent Speeches and Essays. 
Price reduced to $1.00. 

Pyramid of Grizeh. The Kelation of Ancient Egyptian 

Civilization to the Hebrew Narrative in Genesis and Exodus 
and the Relative Claims of Moses and the Pyramid to Inspira- 
tion Considered. By Van Buren Denslow, L.L.D. Price, 25 
cents. 

Religion Not History. An able examination of the 

Morals and Theology of the New Testament. By Prof. F. W. 
Nbwman, of the London University. 25 oents. 



TRUTH SEEKER CO.'S PUBLICATIONS. 1* 

IRON-CLAD AND MANNA SERIES. 
Iron-Clad Series. 

Atonement. Charles Bradlaugh 5 

Secular Responsibility. G. J. Holyoake , 5 

Buddhist Nihilism. Prof. Max Muller 10 

Religion of Inhumanity. F. Harrison. 20 

Relation of Witchcraft to Religion. Lyall 15 

Essay on Miracles. David Hume , 10 

Land Question. Charles Bradlaugh 6 

Were Adam and Eve Our First Parents ? Charles Bradlaugh. 5 

Why Do Men Starve ? Charles Bradlaugh 5 

Logic of Life, Deduced from the Principle of Freethought. 

G. J. Holyoake 10 

A Plea for Atheism. Charles Bradlaugh. . . . 10 

Large or Small Families ? A. Holyoake 5 

Superstition Displayed, with a Letter of Wm. Pitt. Austin 

Holyoake 5 

Defense of Secular Principles. Chas. Watts 5 

Is the Bible Reliable? Charles Watts , 5 

The Christian Deity. Charles Watts 5 

Moral Value of the Bible. Chas. Watts 5 

Freethought and Modern Progress. C. Watts 5 

Christianity: Its Nature and Influence on Civilization. Chas. 

Watts. . 5 

Thoughts on Atheism. A. Holyoako 5 

Is There a Moral Governor of the Universe? A. Holyoake. . 5 

Philosophy of Secularism. C. Watts 5 

Has Man a Soul ? Charles Bradlaugh 5 

Is There a God ? Charles Bradlaugh 5 

Labor's Prayer. Charles Bradlaugh 5 

Poverty; Its Cause and Cure. M. G. H 10 

Science and Bible Antagonistic. C. Watts 5 

Christian Scheme of Redemption. Charles Watts 5 

Logic of Death.; or, Why Should the Atheist Fear to Die? 

G. J. Holyoake 10 

Poverty ; Its effects on the Political Condition of thf> People. 

Charles Bradlaugh 5 

Manna Series. 

New Life of David. Charles Bradlaugh 5 

200 Questions Without Answers 5 

Dialogue Between a Christian Missionary and a Chinese 

Mandarin 10 

Queries Submitted to the Bench of Bishops by a Weak but 

Zealous Christian 10 

Search After Heaven and Hell. A. Holyoake 5 



18 



TRUTH SEEKER CO'S PUBLICATIONS. 



New Life of Jonah. Charles Bradlaugh. 

A Few Words About the Devil. Charles Bradlaugh. 

New Life of Jacob. Charles Bradlaugh. 

Daniel the Dreamer. A. Holyoake. 

Specimen of the Bible. Esther. A. Holyoake. 

Acts of the Apostles, A Farce. A. Holyoake. 

Ludicrous Aspects of Christianity. A. Holyoake 

Twelve Apostles. Charles Bradlaugh. 

Who Was Jesus Christ? Charles Bradlaugh. . 

What Did Jesus Teach? Charles Bradlaugh. 

tiew Life of Abraham. Charles Bradlaugh. . 

Kew Life of Moses. Charles Bradlaugh. . 



5 

5 

5 

10 

10 

10 

10 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 



RECENT PUBLICATIONS. 

AMERICAN SECULAR UNION : Its Necessity and the Justice of 
its Demands. By Charles Watts. 10c. 

BIBLE ANALYZED. By John R. Kelso, A.M. 8vo, 833pp., silk 
cloth, beveled edges. $3. 

BIBLE FABRICATIONS REFUTED AND ITS ERRORS EX- 
POSED. By O. B. Whitford, M.D. 15c. 

BIBLE MORALS: Twenty Crimes and Yices Sanctioned by Scripture. 
By John E. Remsburg. 25c. 

CHRISTIANITY A REWARD FOR CRIME. Authenticated by 
the Bible. By O. B. Whitford, M.D. 10c. 

RATIONAL COMMUNISM. Present and Future Republic of North 
America. By a Capitalist. Advocates associate life and employ- 
ment as a preventive of poverty, vice, crime, etc. 12mo,498p. $1.50. 

RELIGION OF HUMANITY BETTER THAN ETERNAL PUN- 
ISHMENT. By M. Babcock. 10c. 

SABBATH-BREAKING-. By John E. Remsburg. 25c. 

ST. MATTHEW BEFORE THE COURT FOR THE CRIME OF 
FORGERY. By Secularist. 10c. 

SECULARISM, DESTRUCTIYE AND CONSTRUCTIVE. ' By 
Charles Watts. 10c. 

SOCIAL WEALTH. The Sole Factors and Exact Ratios in its Acquire- 
ment and Apportionment. By J. K. Ingalls. 12mo, 320pp. $1. 

THE STORY HOUR. For Children and Youth. By Susan H. 
Wixon. A series of stories void of the superstitious taint that is 
contained in most juvenile books of the day. Interesting and in- 
structive to both old and young. Illustrated by nearly 100 beauti- 
ful engravings. 4to, 224pp. Bds. $1.25. 

TRUTH SEEKER ANNUAL for 1886. Containing Portraits of 
Leading European and Continental Freethinkers. 8vo, pap. 25c. 



TRUTH SEEKER CO.'S PUBLICATION'S. 19 

MAN: WHENCE AND WHITHER. By R. D. Westbrook, D.D., 

LL.D. Cloth, $1.00. 
MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE. R. D. Westbrook, D.D., LL.D. 50 c. ■ 
POSITIVIST'S PRAYER. By Jos. Longchampt. Paper, 25 cts. 

PRIMORDIAL PRINCIPLES of the Universe. By C. E. Town- 
send. 292 pp., cloth, $1.50. 

PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSE, by S. P. Putnam. Paper, 20 cts. 

RECONSTRUCTION OF SOCIETY, by Louis Masquerier. $1.00 

RELIGION THE GIBRALTAR OF THE WORLD, by Geo. T. 
Bondies. Paper, 25 cts. 

RIGHTS OF WOMAN, by Ray D. Chapman. Paper, 25 cts. 

ROMAN CATHOLIC CANARD. Paper, 10 cts. 

SAKYA BUDDHA. A Versified Annotated Version of His Life and 
Teachings. Cloth, $1.00. 

SECRETS OF BEE-KEEPING, by K. P. KIDDER. Boards, 75 cts. 

SECRET OF THE EAST, or, THE ORIGIN OF THE CHRISTIAN 
RELIGION, by Felix L. Oswald, M. D. Cloth, $1.00. 

SOUL PROBLEMS— Theological Amendment and State Person- 
ality, by Jos. E. Peck. Paper, 25 cents. 

SPIRITUAL DELUSION, by D. D. Lum. Cloth, $1.50. 

SUBSTANTIALISM, OR PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE, by 
Jean Story. Cloth, $1.50. 

SUGGESTIVE THOUGHTS. Cloth, 50 cents. 

SUNDAY LAWS, by J. G. Hertwig. Paper, 10 cents. 

THERAPEUT^, by Geo. Reber. Cloth, $1 00. 

TRUTH, A POEM IN FOUR PARTS, by E. N. Kingsley. Paper, 
20 cents. 

TRUTH SEEKER ANNUAL AND FREETHINKERS' ALMANAC 
for 188*. 18 full-page ill., 8vo. 116 pp. Paper, 25 cents. 

TRUTH SEEKER ANNUAL, for 1885, (ready in December '84), 
25 cents. 

ULTIMATE GENERALIZATION, An Effort in the Philosophy 
of Science. Cloth, 50 cents. 

WAIFS AND WANDERINGS. A Novel, by Samuel P. Putnam. 
Cloth, $1.00. Paper, 50 cts. 

WAKEMAN-MITCHELL DEBATE. Paper, 25 cts; cloth- 50cts, 
WAKEMAN'S ADDRESS only. Paper, 15 cents. 

WOMAN SUFFRAGE, by J. G. Hertwig. Paper, 10 cents. 



20 BOOKS FOR SALE AT 



WORKS BY PROF. WILLIAM DEN, 
TON. 

Be Thyself. Price, 10 cents. 

Christianity no Finality; or, Spiritualism Superior to 

Christianity. Price, 10 cents. 

Common Sense Thoughts on the Bible. Price, 10 cts. 
Garrison in Heaven. A Dream. Price, 10 cents. 

Geology: The Past and Future of our Planet. Price, 

$1.50. 

Is Spiritualism True? Price, 10 cents. 

Man's True Sayior. Price, 10 cents. 

Orthodoxy False, since Spiritualism is True. Price, 

10 cents. 

Radical Discourses on Religious Subjects. Price, 

$1.25. 

Radical Rhymes. Price, $1.25. 

Sermon from Shakspere's Text. Price, 10 cents. 

Soul of Things; or, Psychometric Researches and Dis- 
coveries. In three volumes. Price; $1.50 per volume. 

The Deluge in the Light of Modern Science. Price, 

10 cents. 

The God Proposed for Our National Constitution. 

Price, 10 cents. 

The Irreconcilable Records; or, Genesis and Geology. 

Cloth, 40 cents; paper, 25 cents. 

The Pocasset Tragedy. Price, 10 cents. 
What is Right? Price, 10 cents. 

What Was He; or, Jesus in the Light of the Nineteenth 

Century. Price, cloth, $1.25; paper, $1. 

Who are Christians? Price, 10 cents. 

Who Killed Mary Stannard ? Price, 10 cents. 





Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Nov. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



